cultivating a taste for curricular innovation at one ...336631/fulltext.pdf · cultivating a taste...
TRANSCRIPT
1
CULTIVATING A TASTE FOR CURRICULAR INNOVATION
AT ONE UNIVERSITY
A thesis presented
by
Maureen L. Timmons
to
The School of Education
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education
in the field of
Education
College of Professional Studies Northeastern University Boston, Massachusetts
2014
2
© Copyright 2014, Maureen L. Timmons
3
Abstract This study sought to understand whether, and if so how, food can serve as a unifying
element in the general education curriculum at a post-secondary institution. Single food-
themed courses are slowly emerging in higher education but it is rare to find an
institution that has expanded beyond this model into a cross-disciplinarily, food-themed
curriculum. Examining the experiences of faculty involved in an innovative food-themed
curriculum at one university, and employing the diffusion of innovations theory to
provide a framework for the research, this study offers insights into the ways disparate
groups come together to create and spread innovative educational change. The
participating faculty shared their stories and gave their perceptions about the rationale,
implementation and outcomes of the food-themed curriculum. This study finds that while
food is potentially a valuable topic to engage students and connect the siloed disciplines
that often compose general education, student participation has been limited, and the
benefits thus far have been mostly experienced by the faculty in the form of new
opportunities for innovative curriculum design, improved pedagogy and collaboration
with colleagues. In addition, the current food themed curriculum is currently an overlay
to general education and has not been integrated into the curriculum.
Keywords: curricular innovation, food, general education, themed, interdisciplinary, diffusion of innovations, narrative inquiry
4
Dedication
For as long as I can remember, I’ve wanted to pursue a doctorate degree.
Lifelong learning was part of my DNA long before it became an educational buzzword.
I’ve always loved to learn despite many challenges and obstacles along the way. The
opportunity to merge two enduring passions, food and education has been amazing.
Having the opportunity to conduct research that may contribute to the literature emerging
in this area on the higher education landscape is an honor especially after being immersed
for years in the inspiring works of numerous other scholars.
None of this would have been possible without the unconditional love and support
of my family, friends and colleagues. I’ve missed many gatherings and important events
during this academic adventure and each occurrence was met with support, compassion
and understanding. My Mom, Gail Timmons was always cheering loudest and interested
in the daily thesis update despite her battle with cancer over the past two years. Her love
has sustained me throughout the process and her pride in what I was doing made every
minute worth it. Having Mom (and my brother Matthew) at graduation and the doctoral
defense made these two of the most memorable days of my life. Sharing and celebrating
important milestones with family and friends is what life’s all about. I’m grateful for
everyone who shared the journey with me and I look forward to making up for lost time.
5
Acknowledgments
The study contributors for this inquiry were critical to this academic adventure.
Without their willingness to participate and share their detail rich stories this research
would not have been possible. I wish I could name my guide, mentor and host at
Narrative University, as his impact on this study is immeasurable. We met through this
study and it was as if we had been friends forever. The generous spirit that he gave to this
effort was beyond what I could have ever imagined. I only hope that I can emulate his
actions and support someone the way he has helped me through this challenging process
with such generosity and kindness. He is a true exemplar of an educator- always sharing,
learning and teaching. Thank you my foodie friend.
I’m deeply appreciative for my thesis advisor Dr. Leslie Hitch whose early vision
and encouragement for combining my passions significantly guided this transformative
doctoral journey. Her good humor, patience, support and generosity of time and expertise
were instrumental in the completion of this thesis. Dr. Hitch has had a significant impact
on my life. A special thank you to the second reader, Dr. Carolyn Bair for her impact on
my thesis. Her expertise and input had a significant effect on the thesis especially in the
area of general education. Dr. Chris Bosso was kind enough to be the third reader on the
advising team. His contributions were kind, clear and concise. In addition, Dr. Bosso’s
questions and food expertise were invaluable to this process. I am also thankful for his
friendship and generosity. I look forward to continue collaborating through our shared
passion for food. The additional support from Dr. Alan Broomhead was critical to the
thesis process. His writing expertise, guidance, kindness and excellent questions wrapped
6
in British humor were a saving grace on many occasions. For his generosity I am
eternally grateful.
I am also appreciative to three senior administrators at Northeastern Univeristy
who generously supported my quest for a doctorate degree. Their formal letters of
recommendation for admittance into the Doctorate of Education Program were
instrumental in this educational experience. A special thank you to Dr. Philly Mantella,
Jack McCarthy and Bill Mallon.
After working at Northeastern for twenty years is it an honor to also be an alumna
of this outstanding institution. I am so proud to be a member of the university community
and earn a Doctorate of Education degree from Northeastern. This is a dream come true.
Now, it’s time to dream a bigger dream…
7
Table of Contents
Abstract .............................................................................................................................. 3 Dedication .......................................................................................................................... 4 Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................. 5 Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................. 10
Statement of the Problem of Practice ........................................................................ 10 A brief history of general education. ........................................................................ 14 External pressures and institutional realities. ............................................................ 15
A Learned Person – 21st Century Skills ................................................................... 17 Dewey, Food, Education and Inspiration ................................................................. 19 Integrating Food into General Education ................................................................. 20 Problem Significance and Research Justification .................................................... 20 Positionality Statement ............................................................................................... 23 Research Question ...................................................................................................... 23 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 23
Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework .............................................................................. 25 Diffusion of Innovations ............................................................................................. 25
Theory rationale. ....................................................................................................... 26 History. ...................................................................................................................... 27 Diffusion elements and innovation characteristics. .................................................. 29 Adopter categories. ................................................................................................... 31 Reinvention. .............................................................................................................. 32
Theory and Practice .................................................................................................... 33 Chapter 3: Literature Review ........................................................................................ 36
Introduction ................................................................................................................. 36 Curricular innovation and reform attempts. .............................................................. 37 Integrative and interdisciplinary learning. ................................................................ 40
General Education ...................................................................................................... 42 Mission alignment. .................................................................................................... 43 Resistance to change. ................................................................................................ 45 Financial implications. .............................................................................................. 45 Innovative curriculum. .............................................................................................. 46 Coherence. ................................................................................................................ 46
Integrating Food into Higher Education– Selected Examples ................................ 47 Harvard. .................................................................................................................... 50 Lebanon Valley College. .......................................................................................... 51 Menus of Change. ..................................................................................................... 51 The University of California- Berkeley. ................................................................... 52
8
Stanford University. .................................................................................................. 53 University of Barcelona. ........................................................................................... 53
Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 57 Chapter 4: Research Design ........................................................................................... 58
Introduction ................................................................................................................. 58 Research Tradition ..................................................................................................... 58 Diffusion of Innovation Influences on Research Design .......................................... 62 Research Design .......................................................................................................... 63
Research site. ............................................................................................................ 63 Participants. ............................................................................................................... 65
Research Procedure .................................................................................................... 66 Data collection. ......................................................................................................... 66 Data analysis. ............................................................................................................ 68
Trustworthiness. .......................................................................................................... 69 Protection of Human Subjects ................................................................................... 69
Confidentiality. ......................................................................................................... 70 Chapter 5: Report of Research Findings ...................................................................... 71
Narrative University Backstory ................................................................................. 71 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................. 71 Participant Introductions ........................................................................................... 73 Participant Perceptions .............................................................................................. 75
Rationale. .................................................................................................................. 75 Implementation. ........................................................................................................ 79 Outcomes. ................................................................................................................. 83 Impact. ...................................................................................................................... 85 Feedback from students. ........................................................................................... 86 Innovation. ................................................................................................................ 86
Opportunities ............................................................................................................... 87 Wisdom to Share ......................................................................................................... 88 Emergent Themes ....................................................................................................... 89
Integration. ................................................................................................................ 91 Communication. ........................................................................................................ 92 Program misgivings. ................................................................................................. 92 Multi-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary pedagogies. .............................................. 93 Faculty engagement. ................................................................................................. 93 Support systems. ....................................................................................................... 94
Participant Closing Thoughts .................................................................................... 94 Findings Conclusion .................................................................................................... 95
Chapter 6: Discussion of Research Findings ................................................................ 97 Emergent Themes ....................................................................................................... 98
Innovation Challenges. ............................................................................................. 98 The power of food as a theme. ................................................................................ 101 The limitations of faculty ownership and shared governance. ............................... 102
Findings in Relation to the Theoretical Framework ............................................. 102 Re-call. .................................................................................................................... 109
9
Findings in Relation to the Literature Review ....................................................... 109 Curricular innovation, reform attempts. .................................................................. 110 Integration in general education. ............................................................................. 111 Multi-Disciplinarity. ............................................................................................... 111 Food as a powerful theme. ...................................................................................... 113
Innovation in the curriculum. .................................................................................. 114 Program misgivings. ............................................................................................... 115
Gaps in the Literature .............................................................................................. 116 Implications ............................................................................................................... 117
Additional challenges .............................................................................................. 118 Innovation in the curriculum. .................................................................................. 119 Shared governance. ................................................................................................. 120 The power of food in higher education. .................................................................. 120
Future Research ........................................................................................................ 121 Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 123
Documents Collected from and Related to Narrative University ............................. 125 References ...................................................................................................................... 126
10
Chapter 1: Introduction
Statement of the Problem of Practice
According to Lattuca and Stark (2009), “concerns about what colleges and
universities are teaching, how well, assessment and accountability demand from
government agencies and funders, the rise of for-profit education, and advances in
communications technology have brought curricula and teaching under increased public
scrutiny” (p. xiii, xiv). Given their analysis, they believe “the potential for change in post-
secondary education is enormous” (Lattuca and Stark, 2009, p. xiv). In many of the 2,774
four year colleges in the United States (nces.ed.gov 2009/10), some thirty percent of the
baccalaureate degree is dedicated to the general education program (Boning, 2007; Brint,
Proctor, Murphy, Turk-Bicakci and Hanneman, 2009; Harvard Red Book, 1945;
Wehlburg, 2010). However, many writers have argued that, the general education
curriculum at post-secondary institutions across the country may miss the opportunity to
bridge disparate disciplines to create connections, view problems and develop solutions
from diverse perspectives (Awbrey, 2005; Boning, 2007; Chavez, 2007; Mirabella &
Balkun, 2011; Pittendrigh, 2007; Wehlburg, 2010).
General education is defined by the Association of American Colleges &
Universities (AAC&U) as the portion of the curriculum that is common to all students
(AAC&U, 2009b, Wehlburg, 2010). It is typically the foundation of post-secondary
education and ideally reflects the culture and mission of the institution (Awbrey, 2005,
Bok, 2013). When the general education curriculum is misaligned with the values of the
11
institution it can negatively affect student educational experiences (Awbrey, 2005).
According to Ratcliff (1997b) “The educational program of the institution reflects the
norms, values, and behavior of the organizational culture” (p.9). The type of general
education curriculum chosen and implemented by an institution ideally reflects its
mission, values and beliefs about what it means to be an educated person. General
education programs across the country vary widely and if they align with the educational
vision they present to their internal and external stakeholders this will parallel their
educational practices, particularly in the foundational core courses (Nelson Laird,
Niskode-Dossett & Kuh, 2009). However, this is not always the case and fragmentation
of the general education curriculum may signal to external stakeholders that the values
and priorities of the school are not aligned with the institutional mission.
The general education curriculum has been the subject of debate since its
establishment in higher education in the United States (Association of American Colleges
& Universities, 2009a). When Harvard College was established in 1636 it provided a
prescribed curriculum to a homogenous group of elite, white males with a unified
foundation for their college education (Boning, 2007; Wehlburg, 2010). This unified
model continued to serve a similar population until the mid-1800’s (Boning, 2007). In the
early 19th century, Yale was among the first to attempt to define general education
(Awbrey, 2005). The Yale Report of 1828 argued for the continuation of a prescribed
curriculum focused on the classics instead of vocational training for all students. Some
have argued that this set general education reform back for decades (Boning, 2007:
Kanter, Gamson & London, 1997; Wehlburg, 2010).
12
The introduction of the free electives curriculum by Harvard’s President Eliot in
the mid-19th century to create a more individualized education set in motion another wave
of instability in general education. This model also opened a debate about the purpose of
general education. The elective system also allowed faculty more time to focus on
research; specialization became more prominent and gave more power to the disciplines
(Boning, 2007). This combination of events prompted faculty to separate themselves
from the institution and concentrate on their disciplines. In addition, the focus on
individualized education created fragmentation within academia and cast doubt on the
value of a baccalaureate degree (Boning, 2007).
Around the same time, the Morrill Land-Grant of Act of 1862 offered more
opportunity for a wider student demographic (e.g. women, African Americans, working
class people and immigrants) to attend college (Wehlburg, 2010). This Act required land
grant institutions in each state to offer curricula that more closely reflected the changing
needs of society during the industrial revolution and increase in the agriculture and
mechanic arts sectors by including liberal and practical courses into the curriculum
(Boning, 2007). This period in the history of higher education had a significant impact on
colleges and universities across the United States. After centuries of a mostly affluent,
white male demographic attending college, the rest of the population was offered access
to the numerous opportunities provided by higher education (Bok, 2006). The
introduction of the G.I. Bill post- World War II resulted in a larger, more diverse
population seeking a college degree (Bok, 2006). In the last half of the 20th century the
attainment of Bachelor of Arts’ degrees increased from approximately 160,000 to 1.2
13
million (Bok, 2006). The United States population grew 46% during the same period
increased from 150.7 million in 1950 to 281.4 in 2000 (Hobbs and Stoops, 2002).
MacDougall (2000) argued “interdisciplinary curricula can make major
contributions to attaining coherence in general education” (p. 239). He identified
coherence as the “presence of rich, meaningful, and evolving webs of interconnection
between different ideas and bodies of information” (MacDougall, 2000, p. 239) that
constitute the multiple disciplines in the general education curriculum. In a traditional
general education curriculum the courses are disconnected, or siloed by disciplines (Bok,
2006; Fuess & Mitchell, 2011; Huber & Hutchings, 2009;Wehlburg, 2010).
Colleges often struggle when attempting to organize and connect their general
education curricula. This study seeks to understand whether, and if so how, the theme of
food may serve as an interdisciplinary and unifying element in the general education
curriculum. To examine this, the researcher asked faculty members involved in the
innovative Food Themed Cluster (FTC) at Narrative University (NU) to share their
stories and give their perceptions about the rationale, implementation and outcomes of
this program. In order to best tell this story the institution, program identifiers and
participant identities have been provided with pseudonyms although all stakeholders (i.e.
the institution, participants, program identifiers) agreed to fully disclose their identities
for this study.
The question that guided this research was: How do faculty members teaching in
the Food Themed Cluster at Narrative University perceive its rationale, implementation
and outcomes?
14
A brief history of general education.
This brief history is Ivy League-focused, as these institutions have been
exemplars to other schools across the country since they began and continue to act as
bellwethers in academia. Harvard and Yale in particular have been at the forefront of
general education development and reform throughout history (Boning, 2007;
Christensen & Eyring, 2011; Wehlburg, 2010). For better or worse, the influence of these
two institutions has provided a blueprint of general education for other schools to adopt,
modify or ignore for centuries (Christensen & Eyring, 2011).
When Charles Eliot was president of Harvard in 1869 he introduced the elective
system, offering students choices and creating increased fragmentation in the general
education curriculum (Wehlburg, 2010). Then, in 1909 Harvard’s new President Lowell
introduced the distribution curriculum framework that offered choices within the general
education curriculum to expose students to multiple disciplines. This format was widely
adapted across the country in an effort to offer choice within the curriculum. Wehlburg
(2010) cited the introduction of the distribution system as the start of the general
education movement.
The1945 Red Book, Harvard’s report on General Education in a Free Society
advocated coherence, “a unifying purpose and idea” (Boning, 2007 p.8) to combat
fragmentation in general education, noting that general and specialized education were
“vital in a free society” (Boning, 2007 p.8). Boning (2007) posits that a coherent general
education is defined as one “where students are able to make connections and integrate
their knowledge” (p.1). This proposal was not approved at Harvard and yet it still
influenced curricular reform at other institutions (Boning, 2007). The Higher Education
15
Act of 1965 increased diversity in the college-bound population by improving access
supported by scholarships to students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. Over the
next decade three quarters of all institutions reduced general education requirements and
expanded elective offerings, allowing faculty to focus on their disciplines (Boning, 2007).
In 2007, Harvard again reevaluated general education and “encouraged faculty
teaching these courses to create improved learning outcomes by using engaging
pedagogies because evidence shows that such pedagogies promote the desired outcomes”
(Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005 as cited in Nelson Laird, et al., 2009 p. 67). The general
education curriculum approved by Harvard in 2007 was implemented in the fall of 2009,
and the first group of undergraduates experiencing it graduated in 2013. According to
Harvard College Dean Hammonds “We have created a curriculum about connecting”
(Ireland, 2009, p.2). In addition, task force co-chair Simmons noted, “We don’t think a
liberal education is a break from real life – it’s a bridge to real life” (Ireland, 2009, p. 2).
Research confirms that the vast majority of post-secondary institutions employ
some form of the distribution model (AAC&U, 2009a). The distribution model is a
curricular framework that establishes the requirement for students to select a prescribed
number of courses in a collection of disciplines to provide breadth as opposed to the
depth offered in the major. The remainder of schools operate with one or a combination
of the great books, the same core courses for all, or a thematic curriculum that ideally
aligns with the mission and culture of their institution (AAC&U, 2009a).
External pressures and institutional realities.
16
There is mounting political pressure for institutions to graduate students who are
vocationally focused, employable and capable of contributing to society upon degree
completion (Mrig, 2013). Employers are among the external stakeholders in partnership
with their local institutions that are clamoring for improved educational outcomes
(AAC&U, 1995, 2005a, 2007; as cited in Nelson Laird et al., 2009). This is especially
true with publicly funded colleges and universities where taxpayers are investing in
education and are insisting they receive a return on their investments (Kiley, 2013).
In a recent example of how pressure from external stakeholders can translate into
political pressure, the governor of North Carolina, Patrick McCrory proposed legislation
to modify the funding of public colleges and universities to reward them for “post-
graduate employment rather than enrollment” (Kiley, 2013). McCrory joined a growing
contingent of politicians, employers and taxpayers focused on quantifiable educational
outcomes with jobs as the result of a college education. The swiftly rising costs of a
college education, noted in the College Board’s “Annual Survey of Colleges 2011” (The
College Board, 2011), which reports that over 123 institutions charged over $50k per
year for tuition, fees, room and board in 2011/12 versus 100 schools that fell into this
category just the year before is prompting parents to insist that there be a true value to
their students’ post-secondary education and to society as a whole (The College Board,
2011).
External demands for accountability run headlong into institutional realities.
Students more often than not are unenthusiastic about their foundational courses and are
often anxious to move through them quickly to focus on their chosen disciplines (Boning,
2007; Boyer, 1998; Fuess & Mitchell, 2011; Wehlburg, 2010). This is due to a variety of
17
reasons: depending on the criteria established by the institutions, students might have
complete, limited or no freedom in their general education choices (Brint, Bray &
Horton, 2009, Latzer, 2004). Some students are looking for the path of least resistance as
opposed to a cohesive and coherent foundation of courses to build their disciplines upon
(Gaff, 2004; Fuess & Mitchell, 2011; Pittendrigh, 2007; Wehlburg, 2010). Pittendrigh
(2007) states that for many students, “the core seemed an arbitrary collection of hurdles,
rather than a coherent educational foundation” (p.44).
Hence, there is a conflict between the needs and requirements of the external
stakeholders that want college graduates who are employable, have critical thinking skills
and are able to synthesize, and the internal stakeholders in the universities. This
disconnect between internal and external stakeholders surrounding institutional
communities offers numerous opportunities for improvement and alignment. It also leads
to conflict about the role of universities (Bok, 2006; Wehlburg, 2010).
A Learned Person – 21st Century Skills
Many higher education administrators, and some faculty, subscribe to the
importance of coherence in the general education curriculum at post-secondary
institutions as critical to clearly connect baccalaureate foundational courses (Awbrey,
2005; Cronon, 1998; Gaff, 2004). Providing a common set of discussion points across
campus can enhance the learning environment and improve educational experiences
(Nelson Laird et al., 2009; University of California, 2007; American Council of Trustees
and Alumni, 2012). In “Only Connect…” The Goals of a Liberal Education, William
Cronon (1998) argued that “Being an educated person means being able to make the
18
connections that allow one to make sense of the world and act within it in creative ways”
(p.77). In addition, the Yale College Education report (2003) identified the goal of
education as the ability to “develop deep skills…[including] the ability to link and
integrate frames of reference, creating perceptions that are not available through a single
lens” (p.9). If, as stated in most college mission statements, one primary purpose of
higher education is to develop an educated person it would seem reasonable that the
foundation of the post-secondary experience would integrate opportunities to connect.
In 2002 a collaboration between several education organizations such as the
National Education Association and innovative business leaders (e.g. Adobe, Apple,
Blackboard, Cisco, Dell, Hewlett Packer, Lego, Microsoft, Oracle, Walt Disney, Verizon,
and others) created the Partnership for 21st Century Skills to develop the framework
necessary for students to succeed in school, vocations and life (P21.org). In addition to
engaging internal stakeholders, this initiative included a 2010 Critical Skills Survey by
the American Management Association (AMA) that polled 2,115 of its members. The
AMA 2010 survey defined the critical skills as: 1) critical thinking and problem solving;
2) effective communication; 3) collaboration and team building; and 4) creativity and
innovation (AMA survey 2010, P.2).
External stakeholders are therefore clamoring for institutions to train students and
graduate them with an education that contributes to societal needs (Chavez & Hu Poirier,
2007; Hart Research Associates, 2013; Perez & Howard, 2007; Wehlburg, 2010). The
world is interdisciplinary and the ability to make connections across a variety of subjects
is a critical skill unlike many other skills, creativity cannot be outsourced (Friedman,
2006; Pink, 2006).
19
Dewey, Food, Education and Inspiration
To integrate the disciplines, create connections and offer an opportunity to view a
topic through multiple lenses, the answer may lie in food (Cargill, 2005). Food, after all
is a universal need. Moreover, regardless of background, everyone has cultural
attachment to phobias about, ethical or religious restrictions on, and opinions regarding
food.
This idea is not new, actually. Early in the twentieth century, American
educational philosopher, John Dewey argued for experience in education versus
memorization (Lattuca & Stark, 2009). His philosophy inspired numerous educators and
researchers to translate Dewey’s teachings into their food-related pedagogy and studies
(Clandinin & Connelly, 2000; Duster & Waters, 2006; Trubek & Belliveau, 2009). In fact,
Dewey used food at the Laboratory School of the University of Chicago as the core of the
curriculum to engage and educate students (Duster & Waters, 2006). In addition,
narrative inquiry researchers Clandinin and Connelly (2000) cite Dewey as a significant
influence in their work based on his belief that “examining experience is the key to
education” (p. xiii). They also note, “Dewey transforms a commonplace term, experience,
in our educators’ language into inquiry term and give us a term that permits better
understandings of education life” (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000). “Following Dewey, our
principal interest in experience is the growth and transformation in the life story that we
as researchers and our participants author” (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000, p.71).
Trubek & Belliveau (2009) are also inspired by Dewey who saw “cooking as the
ultimate example of producing knowledge through activity and as a tool for student
socialization” (p.16). They believe that when students engage with the topic of food
20
across the disciplines it aids them in the synthesis and analysis of information (Trubek &
Belliveau, 2009).
Integrating Food into General Education
The present research study is premised on the notion that food may be a theme
and topic to connect the general education curriculum and provide improved institutional
learning outcomes. MacDougall (2000) argued that an interdisciplinary cluster in the
curriculum can improve both faculty and student engagement in general education.
MacDougall (2000) offers hope that institutions and faculty willing to seek new
possibilities to create a more connected curriculum will reap the rewards of their efforts.
The topic of food could offer a unifying theme across the general education
curriculum. Food affects every aspect of our lives. We engage with it continually.
Everyone eats, and therefore food could be deemed a universal language shared by a
global citizenry (Cargill, 2005; Chavez & Hu Poirier, 2011; Rozin, 2005; Sommer, Rush
& Ingene, 2011; Steel, 2010). By providing an interdisciplinary and holistic experience to
enhance synthesis across the general education curriculum, food may offer the
opportunity to create the foundation and common educational language for
undergraduates.
Problem Significance and Research Justification
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) identified an enrollment
increase at degree-granting institutions from 2000 – 2010 of 15.3 million to 21.0 million
students, a 37 percent increase (NCES, 2014). This is a significant population of students
21
that could be impacted by infusing connections in the general studies curriculum
(Wehlburg, 2010).
Bateman (2010) also cites the Boyer Commission report (1998) noting that while
graduates receive a degree for the required credit hours, they lack an understanding of
how their courses are linked (Boning, 2007; Chavez, 2007; Huber, Hutchings & Gayle,
2009; Kurland, et al., 2010; Mirabella & Balkun, 2011). These connection skills are
critical to the development of synthesis and analysis considered among the essential
learning outcomes for twenty-first-century learners (AAC&U, LEAP, 2007; Chavez,
2007; Huber, Hutchings & Gayle, 2009; Kurland, et al., 2010; Mirabella & Balkun, 2011).
The use of food to bring cohesion to the curriculum is spurred by the increasing
societal interest in food (Belasco, 2008; Hale, 2010; Miller & Deutsch, 2009; Pollan,
2006, 2009, 2013). Within the last decade, interest in food among the general population
has grown rapidly, with two entire cable networks dedicated to food and many others
with a portion of the primetime lineup dedicated to food-related programming. This is in
addition to books, magazines, social media and blogs. In 2010, Hale dubbed food, “the
social network of the ages” noting that the Nielsen research indicates that 70 million
unique users visit food-related websites monthly (p.1). In addition, in 2010, over one
million households watched Food Network during prime time, up ten percent over the
previous year (Hale, 2010). And while book sales in general declined, cookbook sales
rose five percent to provide additional data supporting an increased interest for all things
food (Hale, 2010).
The purpose of this study was to understand whether, to what extent, and in what
ways, food could serve as a unifying element in the general education curriculum. There
22
are numerous audiences that could benefit from the outcomes of this study.
Undergraduates are especially interested in food, where it comes from, how it is grown,
how it is prepared and how the employees who grow and prepare their food are cared for
(Slow Food, 2013). This level of focus and engagement around the topic of food may
provide a unique opportunity for institutions to connect a portion of the their general
education curriculum thematically through food. Based on the need for coherence in
general education identified by the literature, interest in food and potential connective
opportunities of a food-themed curriculum, this study seeks to contribute to research on
this topic.
A school that has attempted to integrate food into its general education curriculum
is Narrative University (NU). The NU Food Themed Cluster, as part of the Themed
Course Cluster Network (TCCN) proposes to offer an innovative opportunity to satisfy
some of the general distribution requirements through the theme of food across multiple
disciplines (NU Network, 2014).
The Themed Course Clusters Network offer an innovative way for students to
fulfill some of their general distribution requirements while they examine a topic of
interest to them in depth and over several semesters. The networks allow students to
examine an idea, theme, or topic by taking related courses in several different disciplines.
This approach helps students understand the complexity of big issues. By integrating the
perspectives of many different disciplines, students arrive at a more complete and
sophisticated picture of those issues (NU Network, 2014).
23
Positionality Statement
As the Director of Dining Services at my institution and a student in the Doctor of
Education program, I am situated at the intersection of theory and practice with an
opportunity to offer support to higher education institutions interested in infusing food
into the curriculum. I approach this research problem through the lens of a food service
professional with twenty years of experience at an elite private institution in addition to a
lifelong passion for all topics surrounding food and education. As a doctoral student and
a scholar-practitioner, my focus is on the incorporation of food into the general education
curriculum at post-secondary institutions, which has the potential to improve learning
outcomes for students. My interest in the theme of food as a means to unify the general
education curriculum is based on my own experiences in the food service industry and is
further informed by what is happening across the U.S. and around the world, as food
becomes a more important topic beyond daily sustenance.
Research Question
The question that this study seeks to answer is: How do faculty members teaching
in the Food Themed Cluster at Narrative University perceive its rationale,
implementation and outcomes?
Summary
The purpose of this research was to study whether, to what extent and in what
ways the use of food as a unifying theme at a post-secondary institution may connect the
multiple disciplines included in the general education curriculum. Intentionally
24
connecting one third of the baccalaureate curriculum that focuses on general education
may have a significant impact on undergraduate student outcomes if there was a
compelling theme to integrate the disciplines that collectively represent general education.
Food is a theme that may unify the curriculum in this way. However, the research on
infusing thematically food into the general education curriculum is sparse.
This inquiry examined the faculty participants’ perceptions about the rationale,
implementation, and outcomes of the Food Themed Clusters at Narrative University to
determine whether it might provide a model that could be adopted by other post-
secondary institutions.
25
Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework
Diffusion of Innovations
The question that this study seeks to answer is: How do faculty members teaching
in the Food Themed Cluster at Narrative University perceive its rationale,
implementation and outcomes? This question focuses the study on how the innovative
curriculum was introduced, how it was carried out, and its consequences at the particular
institution chosen as the research site. Hence, the theoretical framework needs to be one
that can shed light on how innovations spread or don’t spread. Diffusion of innovations
theory (DoI) aligns with the components of this inquiry and was a good model for the
research exploration.
Sociologist E.M. Rogers (2003) is credited as the originator of Diffusion of
Innovations theory. Rogers (2003) defines diffusion as “the process by which an
innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a
social system” (p.35). Rogers describes a social system as “a set of interrelated units that
are engaged in joint problem solving to accomplish a common goal” (p. 23). While
numerous disciplines have employed the Rogers’ theory, because higher education
institutions are one of the most impactful social systems in society (Pervin, 1967), this
theory aligns particularly well with this study’s problem of practice. Pervin (1967),
argued that, “students and colleges, at least the better of them, reflect the virtues and ills
of our society” (p. 317). When contemplating any change or reform in higher education,
Pervin (1967) suggests that stakeholders be integrated to address the common goal of the
26
social system (Rogers, 2003). Viewing an institution as social system aids in
understanding the diffusion of innovations theory and why higher education is an ideal
model to study.
Theory rationale.
The rationale for choosing Diffusion of Innovation (DoI) theory is the quest to
integrate innovation in every aspect of our lives (i.e. personal, company, and institution).
Rogers (2003) defines innovation as “an idea or object perceived as new by an individual
or other unit of adoption” (p.36). Innovation is one of the buzzwords of the 21st century
and while many institutions proclaim to be “innovative” there is always opportunity for
improvement (Kirschner, 2012, p. 2). Understanding how innovations are introduced and
spread (or not) at post-secondary institutions may be beneficial to stakeholders. The DoI
model provided a lens to examine how the Food Themed Cluster (FTC) at Narrative
University (NU) was diffused and the details that surrounded that initiative.
According to Rogers (2003), DoI research traditions include: Anthropology,
General, Early and Rural Sociology, Education, Public Health and Medical Sociology,
Communication, Marketing and Management, Geography, Economics, Public
Administration, Political Science, Psychology, Industrial Engineering and Statistics.
“DoI’s multidisciplinary nature cuts across the disciplines…to bridge these divergent
disciplines and methodologies…and helps illuminate processes” (Rogers, 2003,
p.103/104). This theoretical framework aided in understanding how curricular change
diffused to and through the research site. As identified in the previous chapter, general
education reform has experienced many challenges throughout history. DoI theory
27
supported the exploration of how the NU Food Themed Cluster adapted a portion of
general education to connect it thematically through the topic of food.
History.
While Rogers is the theorist most closely associated with DoI theory, the origins
of this model are European (Rogers, 2003). Frenchman Gabriel Tarde’s (1903) Law of
Imitation inspired innovation adoption and was the first to identify the S-shaped curve (s-
curve) as the cornerstone of his early version of the DoI theory (Smith, 2013). The s-
curve measures how the innovation is embraced by the adopter categories (i.e.
innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards) over time (Rogers,
2003, p.22). The purpose of Tarde’s observations were to “learn why, given one hundred
innovations conceived at the same time… ten will spread and ninety will be forgotten
(Rogers, 2003, p.41).” To Tarde, “DoI theory was a basic and fundamental explanation of
human behavior change: Invention and imitation are, as we know, the elementary social
acts” (Rogers, 2003, p.41). Tarde’s work influenced DoI theory while using different
words to describe similar processes, such as ‘imitation’ for ‘adoption.’
Another sociologist and peer of Tarde in Germany was Georg Simmel. Both were
engaged with various aspects of DoI theory around the turn of the 20th century. Simmel is
recognized as the first academic to be identified as a sociologist, who taught classes in
that discipline, according to Rogers (2003). As an outlier himself Simmel theorized that
this perspective offered an alternative view of an organization that could provide benefits
during diffusion of innovations (Rogers, 2003). Malcolm Gladwell (2008), author of
Outliers: the Story of Success, defines the term ‘outliers’ as “something that is situated
28
away from or classed differently from a main or related body” (p. 3). Outsiders were
more easily able to innovate without the pressures of group conformity and general
resistance to change. Anthropologists in the United States learned about the concept of
diffusion from their European colleagues in the early 1920’s and began to incorporate it
into their research (Rogers, 2003). While early diffusionists subscribed to a fairly narrow
view that “all social change could be explained by diffusion alone…the dominant
viewpoint now is that social change is caused by both invention and diffusion, which
usually occurs sequentially” (Rogers, 2003, p.43).
Ironically, while many associate DoI theories with technology-related research,
the most influential study employing DoI was from the field of agriculture when Ryan
and Gross (1943) studied how farmers adopted hybrid seed corn in Iowa. In 1928,
agricultural scientists at a land grant institution, Iowa State University, introduced the
hybrid corn they developed to Iowa farmers (Rogers, 2003). According to Rogers (2003),
their study “is the most influential diffusion study of all time” (p.31). In addition, the
Ryan and Gross (1943) study developed the methodological blueprint for diffusion
researchers. Their “retrospective survey interviews in which adopters of an innovation
are asked when they adopted, where or from whom they obtained information about the
innovation, and the consequences of adoption” (Rogers, 2003, p. 33) is still the
benchmark. Their time-tested methodology informs the research design and provides a
lens for the present study.
Ryan and Gross’ (1943) influential study introduced concepts that are applicable
to research in other fields, such as communication channels, rate of adoption, and time.
Such concepts are helpful in framing the present study in the field of education. Also, the
29
general resistance to change addressed in DoI is especially applicable to higher education
(Awbrey, 2005; Kurland, 2010 et al.; Mirabella & Balkun, 2011; Mrig, 2013). The use of
the theoretical framework offers the opportunity to learn about resistance in an
educational setting and understand how, when and with whom innovation is diffused,
stalled or halted (Ryan & Gross, 1943).
Diffusion elements and innovation characteristics.
Rogers (2003) identifies four main elements for the diffusion of new ideas: The
first element, innovation, is an idea (theory or practice) considered new and presented for
adoption. The characteristics and the members of the social system determine the rate of
adoption of an innovation where it is being introduced. These characteristics identified by
Rogers (2003) include “the degree to which an innovation: is perceived as better than the
idea it supersedes (i.e. relative advantage); is perceived as being consistent with the
existing values, past experiences, and needs of potential adopters (i.e. compatibility); is
perceived as difficult to understand and use (complexity); may be experimented with on a
limited basis (i.e. trialability) and results are observable by others (i.e. observability)”
(pp. 15-16). These concepts offer a deeper understanding of the elements that impact the
adoption of an innovation and contribute to the research design of the present study.
Specifically, they provide a valuable lens through which to view all field texts that arose
from the research at Narrative University.
The second element is communication. The channels by which information is
shared are critical to the spread of ideas. Rogers (2003) cites heterophily or homophily as
two ways that humans engage. In a heterophilious network, communication occurs
among people or a group with less in common, while in a homophilious network,
30
communication transpires between like-minded individuals. Although most
communication takes place amid individuals with similar characteristics, innovation is
most apt to occur among more dissimilar people and can often complicate the
communication system (Rogers, 2003).
Third, the adoption of innovations is closely tied to time. This component refers to
how long it takes for people or organizations to learn of the innovation, navigate the
decision process and adopt or reject the idea.
Rogers (2003) identifies five stages in the innovation-decision process:
a) “Knowledge - commences when an individual…[or group] is exposed
to an innovation’s existence and gains an understanding of how it
functions; b) persuasion – the individual forms a favorable or unfavorable
attitude toward the innovation; c) decision- when an individual…[or
group] engages in activities that lead to a choice to adopt or reject an
innovation; d) implementation- when an individual…[or group] puts an
innovation to use; and e) confirmation – when an individual seeks
reinforcement of an innovation-decision already made, but he or she may
reverse this previous decision if exposed to conflicting messages about the
innovation ” (p. 169).
As part of the implementation stage, adoption in DoI does not necessarily mean
the exact innovation in the precise format in which it was originally presented.
Reinvention, a key concept of DoI, is the process of adapting an innovation to suit the
needs those involved in the change process.
31
Finally, the rate at which innovations are adopted is closely connected to the
social systems involved in the process. Rogers (2003) defines a social system as “a set of
interrelated units that are engaged in joint problem solving to accomplish a common
goal” (p.23).
Adopter categories.
Adopter categories help organize the knowledge gained when employing the DoI
theory by sorting participants with similar characteristics into similar groupings. This
methodology provides clarity and allows researchers to better understand diffusion and
adoption. Within social systems, Rogers (2003) identifies five adopter categories, which
he defines them as “the classifications of members of a social system on the basis of
innovativeness” (p. 22).
§ Innovators – “venturesomeness is almost an obsession with innovators. Their
interest in new ideas leads them out of their local circle of peer networks and
into more cosmopolite social relationships” (Rogers, 2003, p. 283).
§ Early adopters – respect, “this category more than any other, has the highest
degree of opinion leadership in most systems…and are localites” (Rogers, 2003,
p. 283)
§ Early majority – deliberate “this group adopts new ideas just before the average
member of a system” (Rogers, 2003, p. 284).
§ Late majority – skeptical types “adopt new ideas just after the average member
of a system” (Rogers, 2003, p. 284).
§ Laggards – traditional – “the last in a social system to adopt an innovation”
(Rogers, 2003, p. 284).
32
Limitations.
While there are many positive attributes associated with the diffusion of
innovations theory, it also has limitations. The drawbacks include: 1) pro-innovation bias
(i.e. assuming all innovations are good, and should be adopted quickly and as presented);
2) individual blame-bias (i.e. blaming the individual person versus the system they are a
part of for not adopting the innovation); 3) recall problem (i.e. memories and their timing
may be unreliable, the time an innovation takes to diffuse is critical to the process and the
participant re-call may imprecise); 4) issue of equality (i.e., innovation often widens the
socioeconomic gaps as ideas are adopted) (Rogers, 2003). While conducting the study at
NU it was important to be cognizant of these limitations and associated biases.
As an example, the most prominent limitations in this study were a pro-innovation
bias and recall problems. The majority of participants were enthused by the opportunities
connected to the innovative Food Themed Cluster. However, during this study one
participant shared a story of being cajoled by colleagues for questioning the merits of the
new curriculum and not fully accepting the new initiatives at face value. In addition,
recall of specific dates, innovation and diffusion details were often challenging for
participants to remember.
Reinvention.
DoI takes an approach that is radically different from most other theories of
change. Instead of focusing on persuading individuals to change, it sees change as being
primarily about evolution or “reinvention” of products and behaviors so they become
better fits for the needs of individuals and groups (Robinson, 2009). In DoI it is not the
people who change, but the innovations themselves that change, are adopted/adapted and
33
spread. This is an important point and is well suited to the wide variety of institutions and
individuals that could potentially adopt an innovation. Re-invention defined by Rogers
(2003) is the “degree to which an innovation is changed or modified by a user in the
process of adoption and implementation” (p.17). This idea of “reinvention” was not
integrated into the DoI theoretical frame or measured until the 1970’s (Rogers, 2003).
DoI addresses and acknowledges the struggles with change and offers insights to
inform the challenges identified in the literature review (see Chapter 3) for higher
education faculty and students with general education (Awbrey, 2005; Fuess & Mitchell,
2011; Gaff, 2004; Mirabella & Balkin, 2011; Pittendrigh, 2007). The adopter categories
identified by Rogers (2003) speak to the rationale for some of the resistance and how to
study and understand it when engaging in diffusion of innovations research.
Theory and Practice
Myers (2011) asked the question, “What obstacles slow the translation of new
knowledge into systemic intervention and how can we increase the rate of diffusion
(p.252)?” To answer, Myers (2011) focused on the diffusion of reform in general
education specifically and noted a gap between theory development and practice in
higher education. According to Myers (2011), critics and educators agree that students
are becoming too specialized too early, too enamored with credentialing, and too
instrumentally driven in identifying the purpose of education. Yet these same educators
“continue replicating the structures that not only produced this trend, but are accelerating
it at a breathtaking pace” (Myers, 2011, p.252). One of the primary contributing factors
is the divide that exists between those who create theory and practitioners (Myers, 2011).
34
Understanding how innovations of curricula in general education spread from the various
stakeholders could provide valuable information to all involved. Myers’ study may offer
beneficial insights for other post-secondary institutions in their general education
programs that may have challenges with a fragmented curriculum (Bok, 2006; Fuess &
Mitchell, 2011; Mrig, 2013; Wehlburg, 2010).
The diffusion of innovations model is a good fit for this thesis as it provides the
theoretical scaffolding to support the problem of practice and narrative inquiry
methodology chosen to explore this research study. Kirschner’s (2012) summary of five
higher education books written by academic insiders in the past four years concludes,
academic culture creates challenges for innovation and reform. Further support is
provided to highlight the urgency for higher education institutions to become more
innovative with additional evidence to motivate higher education institutions:
Once number one in college degrees held by 25-34 year olds, by 2010 the United
States was 12th among 36 developed nations. Graduation rates…lag; tuitions rise
while the unemployment rate is at a record high for recent…graduates, $1-trillion
in student debt-and then our graduates enter the worst job market in years.
(Kirschner, 2012, p. 4.)
The problem of practice for this study employed the diffusion of innovations
theory to illuminate the various components that helped understand how innovations
spread (or do not). This theoretical framework guided the research design by emulating
early DOI studies by Ryan and Gross (1943) that chose retrospective surveys to study the
diffusion of innovation in their historical inquiry. To do so, this study examines the case
of Narrative University, where a food-centric curriculum – The Food Themed Cluster—
35
was established in 2011. NU respondents participated in retrospective surveys to share
their narratives regarding their perspectives of the rationale, implementation and
outcomes of the Food Themed Cluster to date. One of the reasons that NU chose to
enhance its offerings were identified by external consultants who found that the “current
curriculum lacked innovation” (Dr. Physics I, p.5). This rationale combined with
declining enrollments and a need for differentiation from peer institutions created the
motivation and resources necessary to introduce a menu of new curricular initiatives to
more intentionally connect theory and practice for their students.
36
Chapter 3: Literature Review
Introduction
Zayed (2012) observes: The “persistence of general education as a topic of
discussion and debate borders on perennial” (p. 143). The research confirms the on-going
reform challenges in the general education curriculum at post-secondary institutions. The
literature review that follows is categorized into three threads related to general education
at post-secondary institutions: 1) curricular innovation and reform attempts; 2)
integration; and 3) food as a unifying theme. In addition, the literature review identifies
challenges in general education that are rooted in the history of higher education,
academic culture, mission alignment, student and faculty resistance, and coherence
(Awbrey, 2005; Boning, 2007; Bourke, Bray & Horton, 2009; Nelson Laird et al., 2009;
Wehlburg, 2010).
First, there is a review of the studies of innovation and reform in general
education curricula then follows an investigation of how a common theme has been used
to try and unify general education curricula finally, there is a review of the place of food
in the curriculum. Although each of these areas has been studied to varying degrees
separately, there is minimal evidence of the combination of these elements in one study.
The present study seeks to make a contribution to the research literature in this area.
There is a deficit of empirical literature on a food-themed general education
curriculum. Even the literature on single course is limited and has been supplemented
with current curricular efforts that have not yet appeared in peer-reviewed journals. The
literature shares what is currently available with the goal of contributing to the gaps in
research on this topic.
37
Curricular innovation and reform attempts.
A review of innovative models spanned general education reform and unseen
opportunities, Mrig (2013); promising models (AAC&U, 2009); integrative learning:
opportunities to connect (The Carnegie Foundation for Advancement in Teaching, 2009),
and winning by degrees (Auguste et al., 2010). There were also several institutions
identified in The Innovative University (Christensen & Eyring, 2011). Each of these
publications identified colleges and universities illustrating innovative general education
curricula that aligned with the mission and learning outcomes of their respective
institutions. This review highlights differentiating elements unique to each institution and
their general education curricula:
Portland State University (PSU) – this general education curriculum is recognized as a
good example of reform and is regularly highlighted in journal articles and surveys, and
by educational associations. In 1994, PSU implemented a new general education
curriculum. The primary objectives of this reform effort were to create a coherent and
integrated general education curriculum to “enable graduates to develop the attitudes and
skills needed to pursue lifelong learning” (General Education: Promising Models,
AAC&U, 2009). The prescribed program at PSU includes a four-year integrated
curriculum with interdisciplinary courses and a choice of themes to help connect general
education (Mrig, 2013). PSU’s “rigorous and regular programmatic assessment is what
made it possible…to roll out a fully interdisciplinary program articulated across four
years” (Mrig, 2013, p.33). This university employs electronic portfolios to “collect and
evaluate evidence of student progress towards developing metacognitive skills (e.g.
critical thinking and social responsibility)” (Mrig, 2013, p. 33). PSU is touted as “an
38
institution that combined a public mission, large enrollments, and a commitment to
innovation in general education” (Henscheid, O’Rourke and Williams, 2009, p. 282).
University of South Carolina’s (USC) – USC’s reform process invited input for internal
and external stakeholders (i.e. faculty, staff, students, employers, graduate schools) to
understand “what students needed from the undergraduate experience in order to succeed
upon completion” (Mrig, 2013, p. 31). The “Carolina Core” reevaluated its learning
outcomes to confirm relevancy and added two “twenty-first-century outcomes (i.e.
information literacy and social responsibility). This model is cited as a cost-efficient
option as the university did not modify the number of courses or professors teaching but
instead focused on “a mental expectation around outcomes” (Mrig, 2013, p. 31). USC
argued that the most important thing was “changing what students are expected to learn
in each class” (Mrig, 2013, p.31).
University of Maryland at College Park – I-Series (i.e. imagination, inspiration and
innovation) “organized around provocative questions and propositions” (Berrett, 2012,
p.2). These “i-courses” include the “meaty stuff of a discipline—its debates, approaches
to problems, and ways of viewing the world—to freshmen and sophomores, rather than
reserving such intellectual pleasures for upperclassmen and graduate students; many are
taught by senior faculty” (Berrett, 2012, p.2).
University of Chicago – was one of the early adopters to create an interdisciplinary
curriculum in the early 1900’s and has continually been identified as an educational
leader especially within general education. The University of Chicago “Core” is
identified on the Admissions Office website as a “lifelong experience – being part of a
dialogue that encourages conversations…across the disciplines.” The institutional
39
website also distinguishes its general education curriculum as “A vital tenet of the Core is
that interdisciplinary collaboration can illuminate complex problems and that this
exploration is best achieved when students are well versed in multiple disciplines.”
Brigham Young University – Idaho (BYU- I) This institution is regularly recognized as
a benchmark for innovation (Auguste, Cota, Jayaram, & Laboissiere, 2010; Christensen
& Eyring, 2011). BYU-I created a general education program named “Foundations,”
based on inspiration and lessons learned in the reform efforts of the Harvard Core by
presidents: Lowell, Conant, Bok and Summers, who each prioritized the general
curriculum during their tenure (Christensen & Eyring, 2011). The McKinsey report,
Winning by Degrees (2010) also illuminates the unique innovations of BYU-I as one of
eight institutions highlighted in this research study (Auguste et al., 2010). In 2005, Kim
Clark, former dean of Harvard Business School and triple alumnus of Harvard accepted
the position as president of BYU-I (Christensen & Eyring, 2011). Clark identified three
goals for the institution: 1) improve the quality of all student experiences; 2) make BYU-I
available to more students; and 3) lower the cost of education (Christensen & Eyring,
2011).
In addition, Clark agreed with numerous others (Awbrey, 2005; Huber and
Hutchings, 2009; Wehlburg, 2010) “too much breadth in the choice of courses and lack
of integration robs most GE [general education] programs of their intellectual and social
value” (Christensen & Eyring, 2011, p. 263). To counter the lack of integration and
fragmentation, Clark collaborated with faculty to create a common instructional
pedagogy called the “learning model” that is student-focused to “prepare, teach one
another, and ponder and prove” (Christensen & Eyring, 2011, p. 260). While this new
40
campus-wide model was not adopted quickly or seamlessly, eventually BYU-I created an
assessment system for faculty and students to review the effectiveness of this model and
offer opportunities for continuous improvement and support (Christensen & Eyring,
2011).
Each institution cited as an innovative curricular exemplar has developed a
program that fits the unique needs of its students, and reflects its mission. In addition,
each institution has created explicit institutional and curricular learning outcomes.
Regular assessments and a supportive infrastructure supports continual review and
improvements in the curriculum (Auguste et al., 2010; Christensen & Eyring, 2011;
Mrig, 2013).
Since Harvard was founded, it has been identified as an educational leader
(Christensen & Eyring, 2011; Nelson Laird et al., 2009). However, it too, has had
numerous challenges attempting to reform the general education curriculum in alignment
with the institution’s mission and learning outcomes (Christensen & Eyring, 2011).
Nelson Laird, Niskode-Dossett & Kuh (2009) noted that, “Harvard University, for better
or worse is seen as a bellwether of sorts for general education” (p. 67). For centuries,
institutions have attempted to emulate Harvard yet few have the resources or history to
accomplish this.
Integrative and interdisciplinary learning.
While a single, agreed upon definition of general education is missing, Klein
(2005) offers a definition of ‘integrative learning’ as a broad term encompassing
“structure, strategies and activities that bridge divides [between]… general education and
41
the major, introductory and advanced levels, experience inside and outside the classroom,
theory and practice, and disciplines and fields” (p.8). Interdisciplinary studies are
described as “a subset of integrative learning that fosters connections among disciplines
and interdisciplinary fields (Klein, 2005, p.8).
In 2004, the AAC&U and the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching released a joint statement on Integrative Learning. According to the two
organizations, “Fostering student’s abilities to integrate learning-across courses, over
time, and between campus and community life – is one of the most important goals and
challenges of higher education…the cornerstone of a twenty–first century–education”
(Huber & Hutchings, 2004, p. 13). They align with numerous other researchers (Bok,
2006; Fuess, 2011; Wehlburg, 2010) who identify the disjointed general education
curriculum as an area of opportunity in the baccalaureate degree and recommend
employing “integrative learning to…help undergraduates put pieces together and develop
habits of the mind that prepare them to make informed judgments in the conduct of
personal, professional and civic life (Huber & Hutchings, 2004, p. 13).
Interdisciplinary themes were recommended as a component of general education
reform seeking to create integrative learning to develop a framework for students to
connect across the curriculum (Huber & Hutchings, 2004; Lazerson, 2010). Infusing
these practices in the foundational courses of the baccalaureate degree may aid in the
balance of degree attainment (Huber & Hutchings, 2004). Bok (2006) suggests that
integrative learning may help counter the specialization of the major by proposing
creative ways to look across the different problems that confront our society.
42
General Education
The Yale Report of 1828 was cited as the cornerstone of the great general
education debate and initiated a renewed focus on providing students with the knowledge
and skills to become an educated person (Boning, 2007). Although the definition of what
an ‘educated person’ is does not have a singular meaning across institutions, Cronon
(1998) stated that “an educated person means being able to make the connections that
allow one to make sense of the world and act within it in creative ways” (p.77). Cronon
(1998) lists ten items to answer the question, “what is a liberally educated person?” and
his conclusion is that it is someone who is able to make connections.
Gaff (2004) cited the Association of American Colleges &Universities (2004a) as
another set of criteria for a liberally educated person: “ students should acquire the
following attributes: breadth of knowledge and capacity for lifelong learning; abilities to
analyze, communicate, and integrate ideas; and effectiveness in dealing with values,
relating to diverse individuals, and developing as individuals” (p. 1).
The general education deliberation continues with General Education: Unseen
Opportunities, a recent study of 300 institutions where 80% of those surveyed are either
currently reforming or recently reformed their curricula (Mrig, 2013). Based on this
survey of college presidents and academic leaders, Mrig (2013) recommends that ideally
“an institution would design and manage its general education curriculum in such a way
as to achieve three key outcomes: increased persistence, competitive and financial
advantages, improved quality and employability” (p.11). Mrig (2013) reports that instead,
in their general education reform efforts, leaders often “miss out on opportunities to
43
position their institutions more competitively and ultimately better serve their mission”
(p.11).
Mission alignment.
The majority of literature reviewed on general education examined three things:
1) the necessity for coherence; 2) a general resistance to change; and 3) the importance of
the role of organizational culture in any proposed modifications (Awbrey, 2005; Gaff;
2004; Mirabella, 2011; Philpott & Strange, 2003; Pittendrigh, 2007). When considering
cultural or curricular change, Briggs (2007) emphasized that collaboration is critical to
continuous improvement in academia. This idea is especially important for any work
within the general education curriculum to engage all represented disciplines in
enhancing educational outcomes holistically (Briggs, 2007). Levander and Mikkola
(2009) performed a core curriculum analysis that supported the importance of
cooperation among the faculty to collectively focus on an educational experience that
prioritizes teaching and research.
Nelson Laird et al., 2009 cite general education courses as those that collectively
aid in the development of synthesis and critical thinking to support life-long learning in a
knowledge economy. In their study on creating an interdisciplinary curriculum, Kurland
et al. (2010) provided an example of blurring disciplinary boundaries using sustainability
thematically much like the food lens in the present study. Yet while the authors planned
for an interdisciplinary (i.e. connections among the disciplines) course, the results more
closely resembled a multidisciplinary (i.e. subjects taught separately around a theme or
topic, not integrated) effort from the professor’s perspective and learning outcomes
44
experienced by the students. The courses were taught in a variety of disciplines and yet
they were still siloed and students did not experience the connections associated with
interdisciplinary pedagogy. For the next iteration of this course, the authors
recommended a true interdisciplinary framework to gain a greater synthesis across the
disciplines employing the theme of sustainability (Kurland, et al., 2010).
The literature is in agreement that there are opportunities for significant
improvements in the general education curriculum at post–secondary institutions in the
United States (American Council Trustees and Alumni, 2012; Boning, 2007; Boyer,
1998; Gamson, et al, 1997; Mirabella & Balkun, 2011). In 1998, the Boyer Commission
on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University presented a definitive report on
the state of post-secondary education and suggested ideas for improvements. This oft-
cited report (Boning, 2007; Mirabella & Balkun, 2011; Pittendrigh, 2007; Wehlburg,
2010) suggested interventions that research institutions could use to improve their
undergraduate education. These recommendations included the need to focus on teaching
undergraduates in addition to concentrating on research. In other words, according to the
Boyer Report (1998), while research universities are charged with educating the
country’s leaders, they are more focused on research than learning outcomes for
undergraduates, and this contributes to the fragmentation of the general education
curriculum.
Derek Bok, former president of Harvard and author of Our Underachieving
Colleges (2006) summarized some of the primary criticisms of higher education: a lack
of clear purpose for general education, fragmented general education, colleges providing
job training instead of lifelong learning skills, faculty more interested in research than
45
teaching and significant barriers between theory and practice. In spite of the numerous
disconnects surrounding general education, Bok (2006) argued that there are some
indications that a small number of faculty are challenging the status quo to focus on
teaching in the general education curriculum. Ultimately, it is the faculty who are
responsible for the content and quality of general education and how they connect it, or
don’t (Bok, 2006; Boning, 2007; Kanter, Gamson & London, 2007; Nelson Laird et al.,
2009).
Resistance to change.
Philpott and Strange (2003) presented a lens through which to study any proposed
changes to general education. Their analysis offered insight into the inner workings of
faculty and staff cultures as they attempted to collaborate on shared initiatives (Philpott &
Strange, 2003). In this case it was a living learning community on campus being built to
offer a more holistic educational experience, and yet faculty and staff were deeply
challenged by the reality of having to collaborate on such a project regardless of its
contributions to learning outcomes. This study provided a forewarning that any attempt to
modify curricular, cultural or organizational aspects of general education would require a
deep understanding of the academic culture and its general resistance to change (Philpott
& Strange, 2003).
Financial implications.
One item that did not show up in the research on general education was concern
about the financial implications of inefficient general education programs (Mrig, 2013).
According to the General Education: Unseen Opportunities survey, respondents were
46
unsure about the costs and financial impact of general education to the institution (Mrig,
2013). Their findings further indicate that an inefficient (i.e. too many courses, low
participation) general education program contributes to the rising costs of college (Mrig,
2013). The financial impact of an inefficient and/or ineffective (i.e. fragmented) general
education curriculum provides additional support and justification for this study.
Innovative curriculum.
An innovative curriculum may offer differentiation in the higher education market
as a way to attract students and thereby address declining enrollments, and it may also
reduce pressure from external stakeholders (Anonymous, 2013). These stakeholders are
advocating for institutions to produce graduates that are able to make connections and are
employable (Mrig, 2013). Moody’s Investor’s Service rated its 2013 outlook for all
higher education sectors “negative” in January and its findings support the General
Education survey (Moody’s HE outlook, 2013). Previously, Moody’s had a “stable
outlook for these leading [market-leading, research-driven] institutions and a negative
outlook for the rest of the sector since 2009” (Moody’s HE outlook, 2013, p.1). Moody’s
(2013) further argues that “To continue to attract students, higher-ed leaders will need to
both: create distinctive and value-added programs plus minimize costs, passing those
savings along to students” (p.13). Moody’s conclusion aligns with the findings of Mrig’s
survey (2013).
Coherence.
47
According to Boning (2007), “Today, a coherent general education program can be
defined as one where students are able to make connections and integrate their
knowledge” (p.1) both in and outside of the classroom. Employers agree with the
necessity for students to be able to make connections across the disciplines that make up
the general education curriculum. This was confirmed recently by Hart Research
Associates (2013) in a survey of employers on behalf of The Association of American
Colleges and Universities. One of the primary findings of the report was: “Employers
recognize capacities that cut across majors as critical to …[student’s] success [and] are
more important than a student’s choice of undergraduate major” (p.1).
Brint et al., (2009) noted that the lack of coherence in the general education
curriculum has been a consistent target in higher education, and there has been a
continual call for improvements in this third of the baccalaureate curriculum. Although
the reform proposals have been many, the sustainable transformations of general
education are few. Some of the most recent ideas for improvement include the integration
of “thematic bundles of courses to provide perspectives” (Brint, et al, 2009, p. 635) on
important topics affecting our world and society (Carnegie Foundation, 2008; University
of California Commission on General Education, 2007).
Integrating Food into Higher Education– Selected Examples
Integrating food into undergraduate education may offer an opportunity to assist
in connecting elements of the general education curriculum. The literature suggests that a
thematic general education could improve connections and coherence across the
curriculum (Brint, et al., 2009; Kurland, et al., 2010; Mirabella & Balkin, 2011; Mrig,
2013; Pittendrigh, 2007; Resor, 2010).
48
The continuing state of flux in general education identified earlier in the literature
review offers an opportunity to explore how and if infusing food across the disciplines
could offer engaging, cohesive and holistic connections for students to create a solid
foundation to build their post-secondary education upon. It also prompts a further
investigation into why and how institutions have chosen to develop thematically based
general education curricula to create innovative solutions to this collection of fragmented
courses.
Yale University.
Several examples of food as the catalyst for engaged learning were presented in
an article by New York University (NYU) sociology professor Troy Duster and famed
chef, restaurateur and activist, Alice Waters (2006). This rare article combining food and
education from AAC&U publication, Liberal Education (Duster & Waters, 2006) cited
John Dewey, one of the most significant educational theorists of the 20th century, as an
inspiration and early educator who employed food as a catalyst to engage and educate
students at his University of Chicago Laboratory School in 1896 (p.42). In addition,
Waters (2006) created the Edible Schoolyards that started in Berkeley, CA in 1995. They
have now been replicated across the country to integrate food into the curriculum in K-12
to engage students and enhance learning outcomes. In 2001, Waters partnered with Yale
University to cultivate the Yale Sustainable Food Project, which exists to integrate food
into the curriculum by connecting theory and practice (Duster & Waters, 2006). This
project also encouraged university-based researchers to study this subject and publish the
results to expand the literature on this important topic of food and education. To build on
and support food education initiatives, Waters also created the Rome Sustainable Food
49
Project in 2006 to “provide the community of the American Academy in Rome with a
collaborative dining program that nourishes scholarship and conviviality” (“Rome
Sustainable Food Project-about,” 2012). Recently, the Wall Street Journal Magazine
awarded Alice Waters the “Humanitarian Innovator of 2013” award to acknowledge her
commitment and contributions to placing food at the core of all levels of education in the
United States and globally (Kahn, 2013).
Bonnekessen (2010) concurred with Waters (2006), Duster (2006) and Dewey
(1915) that food may be an engaging thematic pedagogy. Bonnekessen (2010) conducted
a case study while teaching a class infused with food to delve deeper into education and
offered an interesting blueprint for a future single course research design. A single class
qualitative study was conducted by Bonnekessen (2010) that focused on classroom
observations and demographic surveys to garner data on incorporating the topic of food
into the curriculum. The universal language of food (Cargill, 2005; Chavez & Hu Poirier,
2011; Sommer et al., 2011; Steele, 2010) was employed as a means for students to delve
deeper into their coursework with the familiar topic of food and investigate potentially
sensitive subjects including: socioeconomics, race, gender, culture and class
(Bonnekessen, 2010).
Philosophy professor Lisa Heldke, from Gustavus Adolphus College (GAC)
responded to a query sent through the Association for the Study of Food and Society list-
serve by sharing material that she presented at the 2008 Association for the Study of
Food and Society /American Food and Human Values Society (AFHV) conference. Of
all the literature reviewed, this material is most closely related to this thesis. Her research
included thirty interviews with colleagues at GAC prompted by the question “What’s
50
food doing in your department?”(Lisa Heldke, personal communication, April 23, 2012).
Through a qualitative analysis Heldke (2012) identified food as “a substantive element:
Food already is present as a fully integrated, essential, even foundational conceptual
component of several departments, including: Biology, Anthropology and Health and
Exercise Science” (ASFS/AFHV, 2008). Heldke (2012) also noted that even in
disciplines where food holds a significant role, “the importance of food per se is not
always recognized or acknowledged– even by disciplinary insiders. Food “does business
as something else entirely, which is one of the ways the subject hides in plain sight, even
where its conceptual role is most important” (Lisa Heldke, personal communication,
April 23, 2012). Because food is such a common element that affects our lives daily in a
multitude of ways it is often dismissed as ordinary.
Harvard.
Food is often introduced to institutions academically through a variety of
departments including dining services, and then trickles into the curriculum, as is the case
at Harvard. In 2005, Harvard created the Food Literacy Program introduced through the
dining department in an effort to connect food and academics. Years later, the School of
Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS) at Harvard created a course and lecture series
in the fall of 2010 titled: From Haute Cuisine to the Science of Soft Matter, taught by
Harvard academics and world-class chefs (“Harvard SEAS,” 2010). “The course uses
food and cooking to explicate fundamental principles of applied physics and engineering”
(“Harvard SEAS,” 2010). The class was so popular among undergraduates that Harvard
had to use lottery system to choose from over 700 students for the 300 seats available. In
addition, the public lectures were available on a first come, first served basis and were
51
some of the most difficult (free) tickets to acquire in the city (First, 2010). This course
and accompanying lecture series has continued on with the fourth season that began in
fall semester 2013. In the 2013 school year, edx and HarvardX, Harvard’s newest online
learning initiative, offered a massively open online course (MOOC) featuring the same
science and cooking course with 45,000 people registered before the start date (Fulton,
2013).
Lebanon Valley College.
At Lebanon Valley College in Annville, PA, Dr. Robert Valgenti received a grant to
provide a convivial and educational dining experience on campus beginning fall 2013,
resulting in the Engage, Analyze, Transform (E.A.T.) program (R. Valgenti, personal
correspondence, June 17, 2013). The mission of this program is to “think of the dining
hall as a space where some of the core missions of the college are embodied and enacted
through food offerings, creative programming, and the sustainability initiatives” (R.
Valgenti, personal correspondence, June 17, 2013). In addition, “This program aims to
combine the resources of academic programs, student affairs, and dining services in order
to rethink the educational space beyond the walls of traditional classrooms. The purpose
of this collaboration will be to further the institutional goals of critical thinking, ethical
reasoning, respect for diversity and commitment to sustainability” (“E.A.T-Diversity for
the palate,” 2013).
Menus of Change.
52
At the June 2013 inaugural symposium of the Harvard School of Public Health –
Department of Nutrition and the Culinary Institute of America (CIA), these two
academically diverse institutions, and leaders in their respective areas of expertise,
focused on the future of food and the $660 billion dollar revenues the industry generates
(“Menus of Change,” 2013). They are interested in understanding and focusing on the
collective purchasing power of all food businesses on the local, sustainable, health, and
environmental factors and improve our planet. Harvard and CIA want to provide an
interdisciplinary Global Positioning Service (GPS) for the food service industry. The
“elemental role that food plays in our lives including nurturing relationships and building
community…these connections help drive innovation and growth necessary in our
diverse global economy”(“Menus of Change,” 2013). This collaborative effort continued
in 2014 with an even more urgent message for attendees to work interdisciplinarily to
include theory and practice to engage the significant food-related issues impacting our
world.
The University of California- Berkeley.
Sponsored by Alice Water’s Edible Schoolyard Project, Michael Pollan, journalism
professor at Berkeley and best-selling author of popular books such as Cooked (2013),
The Omnivore’s Dilemma (2006) and In Defense of Food (2008) taught the second
Edible Education course in the fall of 2012 for 400 students and 300 members of the
community (Mindess, 2012). This course was taught through the Journalism School at
UC–Berkeley.
53
Stanford University.
The Food Summit was established in 2010 with the objective of determining the
interest in food issues at the seven schools of Stanford including: medicine, earth sciences,
business, humanities and sciences, law and engineering (“Food Summit,” 2010). This
initiative is situated in Stanford’s Medical School with interdisciplinary and dining
services support. The organizer of the cross-disciplinary initiative was Dr. Christopher
Gardener of the School of Medicine (Digitale, 2010 November 4). Dr. Gardener is also
on the Scientific & Technical Advisory Council for the Menus of Change, 2013 and 2014
initiatives.
University of Barcelona.
The world famous El Bulli restaurant in partnership with the University of
Barcelona is creating the Bullipedia Unit, the world first culinary wiki (“Bullipedia,”
2013). The university will provide “academic counseling and create synergies among
university experts on different fields of knowledge and the team of El Bulli Foundation”
(“Bullipedia,” 2013). This academic unit will focus on the culinary contributions of El
Bulli and operate interdisciplinarily. Ferran Adria is considered one of the most
innovative and creative chefs in the world and his restaurant El Bulli in Roses, Spain was
ranked the best restaurant in the world with over two million requests per year for only 50
reservations per night, six months per year. Beyond this level of popularity, Adria
approaches cooking more like an academic researcher than a cook, and this methodology
has produced a legion of disciples from around the world who apply to El Bulli to work
for free just to be a part of the educational experience (Abend, 2011). When El Bulli was
54
operating (it closed in 2011), the commitment to innovation and creativity was supported
by the restaurant’s schedule (open six months per year) and the balance of the year was
spent creating the next season’s menu at the “taller” (i.e. Spanish for food laboratory) in
Barcelona. Ferran Adria and his team of chefs have invented numerous avant-garde
concepts, such as molecular gastronomy, that have been emulated in the best kitchens
across the globe and taught at Harvard (Fulton, 2013).
Adria is also the headliner and a funding source of the Harvard School of
Engineering and Applied Sciences (SEAS) course noted earlier and affiliated with the
Alicia Foundation, one of the sponsors of the program (Fulton, 2013). Along with Ferran
Adria, Jose Andres, also from Spain and alumnus of elBulli is part of the culinary lineup
at the SEAS Food/Science class. In addition, Andres teaches a course, The World on a
Plate: How Food Shaped Civilization, at George Washington University that includes
other chefs, restaurateurs, scientists and academics (“The World on a Plate,” 2013). In the
overview for Andres’ course, he cited Ken Bain’s assertion that opportunities for learning
should be presented as an “invitation to a feast” (Bain, 2004, p. 75). Although, Bain
likely meant this metaphorically, it suggests that food may offer an engaging topic for
students.
Further evidence of the integration of food into the curriculum was published in
the New York Times article by Spiegel (2012) noting that food is appearing more often in
academia. Spiegel (2012) maintains that food is an integral part of many general
education programs including agriculture, business, health, the economy, sustainability,
culture, war and peace. The critical role of food infused into the disciplines that comprise
the general education curriculum was also presented in an article titled “A Food
55
Manifesto,” in which Steel (2009) defined food as “a cultural force...that enables us to
start thinking not just about food, but through it” (p. 44). This idea supports the concept
of using food as a lens to engage students across the general education curriculum. Steel
(2009) joins Waters (2006), Cargill (2005) and Spiegel (2012) in classifying food as a
commonality shared by all and further identifying food as a unifying and connective
element.
Cargill (2005) identified food as an ideal topic to support interdisciplinarity. One
of the essential elements cited in Cargill (2005) focused on the critical thinking skill
development and synthesis that students may learn by engaging across the disciplines
through the lens of food. Academics engaged in interdisciplinary education would also
experience benefits in their teaching and research by blurring boundaries of the
disciplines (Cargill, 2005). Resor (2010) argued that food integrated thematically aids in
connecting students to more global issues through something they interact with and
consume multiple times per day. She also supported Cargill’s (2006) contention that the
incorporation of food as a theme provides the opportunity for students to understand the
impact of their choices across the disciplines. Sommer, Rush, and Ingene (2011)
concurred that food offers an ideal connective framework when attempting to understand
our world.
Chavez and Hu Poirier (2007) engaged students with an “experiential gourmet
approach” (p.505) using food as the common language to provide a diverse classroom
with a vocabulary to understand the students’ similarities and delve deeper into the
subject matter. Food created a universal lens for diverse classroom populations to focus
on shared experiences. Within their food-centric classroom environment, Chavez and Hu
56
Poirier’s (2007) findings aligned with those of Bonnekessen (2010) who employed food
as a unifying element in her classroom experiment to integrate potentially challenging
subject matter through the quotidian topic of food.
Currently, there is a lack of peer-reviewed research on integrating food into the
general education curriculum. Despite the emphasis on food by popular writers and New
York Times best sellers such as Michael Pollan (2013, 2008, 2006), there is a significant
void in scholarly research into how and whether the universality of the subject of food
can help make the general education curriculum more engaging and facilitate connections
across the disciplines. Perhaps for academia, the subject of food is too commonplace
(Belasco, 2008; Cargill, 2005; Nestle & McIntosh, 2010) to warrant serious study. Yet, it
is universal. According to Heldke (2012), food is often so commonplace it often becomes
invisible even when it exists in the academe (personal communication, Heldke, 2012).
However, there is evidence that such programs have emerged and grown at
Harvard, Stanford, University of California- Berkeley and Yale. Academics outside
traditional culinary, hospitality and food studies programs are engaging with food as a
worthwhile and critical topic to teach, study and research.
The true value, interest and connective elements that food offers may contribute
to education by creating cross-curricular associations and an opportunity to unify the
general education curriculum. Creativity, connection making and synthesis are critical
proficiencies necessary to thrive in this global knowledge economy (Friedman, 2005;
Pink, 2006; Robinson, 2006). In addition to providing a connected core, the addition of
food could engage students by increasing opportunities for retention and improving the
skill sets they need to be employable. Vocational preparation and employability are top
57
priorities for external stakeholders including employers, politicians and communities
supporting public education (Hart Associates, 2013; Mrig, 2013; Nelson Laird, et al.,
2009).
Conclusion
The present study is focused on innovative approaches to general education
employing food as a unifying element and how faculty member perceive the rationale,
implementation and outcomes of such a curriculum.
There is evidence of an emerging movement to offer opportunities for students to
engage in deeper learning through the integration of food but this is mostly in singular
courses (e.g. Harvard, Yale, University of California at Berkeley). An institutional
example of the infusion of food into a portion of general education curriculum is
Narrative University, the research site for this study.
There is an abundant amount of literature that provides evidence of the challenges
that exist in the general education curriculum today and that have persisted for over a
century (Awbrey, 2005; Bok, 2006; Boning, 2007; Gaff, 2004; McDougall,
2000;Mirabella & Balkun, 2011; Wehlburg, 2010). The lack of coherence and
institutional mission alignment combined with student and faculty resistance creates an
opportunity to improve general education. While there is extensive research on the issues
in general education (Bok, 2006; Fuess & Mitchell, 2011; Kurland et al., 2010; Nelson
Laird et al., 2009; Pittendrigh, 2007) there are gaps in the literature on how to address
them with a unified food-themed curriculum.
58
Chapter 4: Research Design
Introduction
The purpose of this research is to study whether, to what extent and in what ways
the use of food as a unifying theme across the general education at a post-secondary
institution can create connection across disciplines.
Research Tradition
To align the problem of practice with the methodology best suited to pursue this
research a qualitative approach was chosen. A qualitative methodology provides the
model investigational platform for this thesis. This approach focuses on understanding
the “multiple meanings of participants experiences” (Creswell, 2003, p. 18). The type of
data collected for a qualitative study includes: interviews with open ended questions,
observations and field texts (Creswell, 2003). A qualitative methodology also makes it
possible to “establish meaning of a phenomenon from views of participants” (Creswell,
2003, p. 18) when little research exists and the topic is relatively new. A quantitative
methodology examines cause and effect thinking using statistical analysis that was not
appropriate to research this problem of practice (Creswell, 2003). Creswell (2007)
provided justification to support a qualitative methodology as the ideal model to study
this problem of practice by noting that, “we conduct qualitative research because we need
a complex, detailed understanding of the issue” (p.40). “This detail can only be
established by talking directly with people, going to their places of …work and allowing
59
them to tell their stories…”(Creswell, 2007, p.40).
This qualitative study seeks to understand the experiences of the Narrative
University (NU) faculty members by exploring the rationale, implementation and
outcomes of the Food Themed Cluster (FTC), employing the application of a food lens to
a portion of the general education curriculum. Traveling to the Narrative University
campus to meet with faculty and hear their stories about the innovative food themed
curriculum aligns with the intent and framework of a qualitative study and narrative
inquiry.
The need to understand how the Narrative University (NU) faculty teaching in the
Food Themed Cluster (FTC) experienced the rationale, implementation, and outcomes of
this food-themed curriculum provided the content for this inquiry. Given the potential
impact of a food-infused curriculum, it could be beneficial to understand how this
institution created this curriculum as a model for other schools considering a similar
approach. This research design also aligns well with the diffusions of innovation theory
and the qualitative choice of narrative inquiry. Conducting interviews with the program’s
faculty offers the opportunity to understand how an innovative curriculum spread to (and
within) their institution and how they perceive its rationale, implementation and
outcomes. In addition to learning about how it diffused to the institution it was beneficial
to also understand how it was dispersed across the disciplines included in the FTC to
create connections in general education.
The methodology that aligned best with the goals of the study is narrative inquiry.
Narrative inquiry is a qualitative research method with a lengthy history. Stories have
60
existed since the beginning of time. There are numerous theorists from various fields (e.g.
anthropology, psychology, psychotherapy and organizational theory) who have used
narrative inquiry in their research but Clandinin and Connelly (2000) are regarded as the
leaders of narrative inquiry in the field of education (Creswell, 2007) and they cite John
Dewey as their influence (Clandinin &Connelly, 2000). This methodology is used to
research “the lives of individuals and asks them to provide stories about their lives”
(Creswell, 2003, p.15). It can give insight into a deeper understanding as “information is
retold and restoried by the researcher into a narrative chronology” (Creswell, 2003, p.15).
Examples of narrative inquiry studies have included a multi-decade study on teacher
knowledge at Bay Street School by Clandinin and Connelly (2000). It is especially suited
to studies in education because education is comprised of experiences. A narrative
methodology provides the rich, complex and detailed participant stories for
understanding this inquiry (Creswell, 2007). According to Clandinin and Connelly (2000),
“Educators are interested in life” (p. xxii) and narrative inquiry can illuminate that focus
by providing a framework for researchers to explore a deeper understanding of a problem
of practice.
Clandinin and Connelly (1990) were the first in educational research to use the
term narrative inquiry (Clandinin, Pushor & Orr, 2007). The “narrative tells the story of
individuals unfolding in a chronology of their experiences, set within their personal,
social and historical context, and including the important themes in those lived
experiences” (Creswell, 2007 p.57). “Narrative inquiry is stories lived and told”
(Clandinin & Connolly, 2000, p.20).
61
Stories have a beginning, middle and end and a chronology may also consist of
past, present and future (Clandinin & Connolly, 2000; Creswell, 2007; Czarniawska,
2004). This aligns with the research question: How do faculty members teaching in the
Food Themed Cluster at Narrative University perceive its rationale (beginning, past),
implementation (present, middle) and outcomes (future, end)?
Narrative inquiry aligns well with the Diffusion of Innovations (DoI) theory that
is the theoretical lens for this study. DoI-based studies frequently make use of interviews
with multiple participants, as, for example, Ryan and Gross (1943) did when studying the
diffusion of hybrid corn farming among farmers in Iowa. Understanding how or to what
degree the thematic food curriculum was diffused at NU by faculty and students enriched
this exploration through the telling of the shared stories.
Stories or narratives have offered a powerful vehicle for communication and
connection throughout civilization (Pink, 2006). Today, innovators, creative gurus,
thought leaders, and educators view storytelling as a critical skill necessary to survive and
thrive in the 21st century (Isaacson, 20012; Pink, 2006; Robinson, 2006). Employing
narrative inquiry will be a way to share the NU faculty participants’ understanding of the
rationale, implementation and outcomes of the Food Themed Cluster (FTC) with others
who may be interested and could benefit from their experiences.
One of Clandinin and Connelly’s (2000) role models for sharing life experiences
through narrative inquiry is John Dewey. Dewey was a pragmatic and progressive thinker
who founded the Laboratory School at the University of Chicago in the late 1800’s
(Duster & Waters, 2006). The laboratory school created a curriculum to put into practice
Dewey’s theories of integrating education into student’s lives through experiential
62
learning, which included food and the kitchen as a central theme to engage students in
their primary subjects through the lens of food (Duster & Waters, 2006). Dewey also
inspired Alice Waters, noted in the literature review, to create the Edible Schoolyard
focused on integrating food into the curriculum and develop the Yale Sustainable Food
Project to address the needs of post-secondary intuitions (Duster & Waters, 2006).
The narrative inquiry method employed by Clandinin, et al. (2007) also echoes
Dewey’s theories on education and research including three commonplaces of narrative
inquiry they identify as: temporality (i.e. all events or people have a past, present and
future, placing things within the context), sociality (i.e. individual context) and place (i.e.
inquiry location), (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000).
Diffusion of Innovation Influences on Research Design
DoI Theorists Ryan and Gross (1943) developed the original blueprint for
diffusion researchers with their study of how a group of Iowa farmers adopted hybrid
corn seed. Rogers (2003) cited their study as one of the “most influential diffusions
studies of all time” (p. 31). Their “retrospective interviews in which adopters of an
innovation are asked when they adopted, where or from whom they obtained information
about the innovation, and the consequences of the adoption” (Rogers, 2003, p. 33) was
also the model for the present FTC study. The NU faculty members who took part in the
study were the primary adoptees of the innovative FTC. The ‘retrospective interview’
created by Ryan and Gross (1943) for DoI studies was employed to understand when the
FTC study participants adopted the FTC, where and from whom they learned about the
FTC, and the consequences of the adoption of FTC. These themes were woven through
the interview questions posed to study participants to gain an understanding of their
63
perspectives of the rationale, implementation and outcomes of the FTC. In retrospective
interviews, the accuracy of participants’ memories impacts the study outcomes. This was
also true of the NU FTC study especially regarding start dates, program modification
dates, rationale for the NU Clusters and inspiration or best practices gleaned from other
institutions who may have introduced a similar thematic model into their curriculum.
Research Design
The general narrative method outlined by Clandinin & Connelly (2000) proceeds
as follows. First, the researcher negotiates with the participants to collaborate for the
narrative inquiry. Next, the researcher interviews participants and collects field texts (i.e.
on-site observations, notes, interviews, digital recordings, and documents including
marketing materials) to provide content for the story of the food-themed curriculum being
researched. Finally, the researcher re-storied the materials gathered during the inquiry
and provided them to the participants for their comments and to ensure that their stories
were fairly represented. These narratives or stories sought to articulate the study
participants’ perceptions of the rationale, implementation and outcomes of the Food
Themed Cluster at NU. The researcher then re-storied the narratives by sequencing them
into chronological order, connecting different elements and creating an overall flow to
the story (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000). To examine the problem of practice, narrative
inquiry offered a deeper understanding of the participants’ experiences of integrating
food into a portion of the general education curriculum.
Research site.
64
Narrative University’s recently created Food Themed Cluster program was the
focus for this research study. NU is a small institution founded over 170 years ago with
approximately 2,000 students and a large number of concentrations including the newly
formed Themed Course Clusters Network (NU blog, 2012). NU was awarded two grants
from the Mellon Foundation to “create a model liberal arts curriculum for the 21st
century” and “support continued development” of the Themed Course Clusters Network
(NU blog, 2012, p. 1). The faculty collaborated to create these innovative “Clusters
Network” to thoughtfully combine theory and practice for improved learning outcomes.
The Themed Course Clusters Network programs started in fall of 2011 and after a year
they had 50 faculty, over 100 students, and eight themed programs in the network (NU
blog, 2012). In the fall of 2012, Themed Course Clusters Network added a food themed
curriculum, which continued through the 2013/14 school year and began its third year in
September 2014.
Declining enrollments, in part were identified as one of the motives for enhancing
curricular initiatives at NU in a recent article by Anonymous (2013) in The Chronicle of
Higher Education. One strategic model would be developing “institutional
distinctiveness” to improve enrollments (Anonymous, 2013, p.2). When the current
president arrived at NU in 2008 when the institution was experiencing enrollment
challenges which continued through 2011 when NU introduced the Clusters Network
initiatives (Anonymous, 2013). In 2012 the Themed Course Clusters Network offerings
were expanded to include the food theme that has become the most popular offering of
the collection. NU invested significant resources (i.e. time, financial investment and
human resources) that the Themed Course Clusters would create an innovative
65
curriculum that would differentiate them from their peers and appeal to college aged
students. It is too early in these initiatives to understand the impact of the curricular
enhancements and there is a lack of data to verify institutional impact to date.
The Food Themed Cluster is identified as a multidisciplinary model with the
intention among faculty teaching in the program for it to evolve into an interdisciplinary
curriculum according to the program director, Dr. Environmental Science (personal
correspondence, October, 2013). Interdisciplinarity is achieved when courses are
integrated with several disciplines around a theme while multidisciplinarity is described
the teaching of a topic through the lens of various disciplines yet not integrated.
Participants.
The participants for this narrative inquiry were six faculty members at Narrative
University (NU) who taught in the Food Themed Cluster. The engagement of six faculty
members from across five different disciplines represented in the NU Food Themed
Cluster offered breadth and interdisciplinarity of perspectives for this inquiry and created
an opportunity to fully explore the narratives related to this phenomenon. The professors
teaching in the FTC represented a mix of disciplines contributing to this initiative
including: Physics, English, Literature, Sociology and Environmental Science (NU Food
Themed Cluster, 2013).
NU professor and program director, Dr. Environmental Science queried his
colleagues teaching in the Food Themed Cluster in spring 2014 to see if they would be
interested in participating in the research for this thesis. Initially, all twenty six-faculty
members teaching in the FTC were interested in partaking in the narrative inquiry. When
66
the IRB approvals from Northeastern and NU were received, the researcher sent an email
(Appendix A) to formally invite the NU faculty teaching in the Food Themed Cluster to
participate in the research for this thesis. Six members of the FTC faculty responded
affirmatively to participate in the study.
Research Procedure
The procedure for this study included development the research design based on
the narrative inquiry model, IRB submissions and approvals for both institutions involved.
In addition, it incorporated communication with study participants, the site visit to collect
data and the analysis of field texts (i.e. interview transcripts).
Data collection.
According to Clandinin and Connelly (2000), field texts (i.e. data) are “created,
neither found nor discovered, by participants and researchers in order to represent aspects
of field experience” (p.92). In narrative inquiry, field texts may include: research
interviews, field notes, emails, conversations, documents, life experiences, etc. For this
study, those methods were employed, and in addition, the following sources were
referred to: the NU website and blog; FTC faculty- lunch and learn; NU admissions tour
and marketing materials; dining services tour and travel notes.
The research focused on the six participating faculty members at Narrative
University (NU) who developed the program; teach in the Food Themed Cluster and
provided valuable insights into the rationale, implementation and outcomes of the FTC.
The specific group (i.e. professors at NU) for this study shared stories that were
67
transcribed, analyzed and then re-storied to create a cohesive and chronological story of
the past (rationale), present (implementation) and future (outcomes) of this phenomenon,
that is consistent with a narrative study design (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000; Creswell,
2007).
Storying and restorying provided the research data for this narrative inquiry.
Storying involved collecting narratives from participants as part of the inquiry process.
These stories reflected their lived experiences. Through the process of gathering the
accounts provided by the selected contributors, the researcher re-storied or reconstructed
their narratives. Re-storying, according to Clandinin & Connelly (2000) is the re-telling
of narratives to “allow for growth and transformation” (p. 71). Re-storying also permitted
the reorganization of stories to follow a narrative chronology that aligned with both
narrative inquiry and the diffusion of innovations theory (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000;
Rogers, 2003).
All faculty members teaching in the Food Themed Cluster (FTC) at Narrative
University (NU) were invited via email (Appendix A) to participate in this research study.
Six members of the FTC chose to participate. The sole criterion for inclusion in the study
was teaching in this newly established program. None of the participants were excluded
based on age, gender, ethnicity/race or socio-economic level. The NU respondents were
not compensated for their participation in the research.
The procedures for this research included each participant completing a pre-
interview information sheet, (Appendix B) and participating in a one-hour interview. The
one-on-one semi-structured interviews occurred in sixty-minute sessions in the spring
semester of 2014 at Narrative University. In addition, during the site visit to interview the
68
faculty there was an opportunity for the researcher to gain an understanding of how
environmental factors (i.e. campus size, setting, institutional characteristics) impact the
study and narrative inquiry. Prior to the face-to-face interviews conducted by the
researcher, participants received the interview questions (Appendix C) to assist them in
preparing for the interviews.
Data analysis.
Following the interviews, the researcher coded and analyzed the transcribed
digital recordings. The pre-interview questions offered demographic information on the
respondents to illuminate similarities and differences. Each of the six transcripts were
coded individually and categorized to align with the rationale, implementation and
outcome research question. Mind maps were employed as part of the coding and analysis
component of the research to help identify themes that emerged from the faculty member
participant interviews.
The data analysis for this narrative inquiry included:
1. Transcriptions of the digitally recorded interviews with faculty members
teaching in the Food Themed Cluster at Narrative University.
2. Coded transcripts of the interview sessions.
3. Analysis of interview records to identify themes that emerged from the
participant’s narratives.
4. Use of mind maps detected and categorized inquiry themes.
5. Use of Clandinin and Connelly’s (2000) three-dimensional space approach for
narrative inquiry analysis.
69
a. “Interaction (personal and social)
b. Continuity (past, present, future)
c. Situation (physical spaces and storyteller’s spaces)” (p.49)
Trustworthiness.
Creswell (2007) wrote “qualitative researchers strive for understanding…during
or after the study, qualitative researchers ask, ‘Did we get it right’?” (p.201). To validate
whether the re-storying properly represented the participants’ narrative the researcher
emailed the re-storied version of their narratives and offered an opportunity for the NU
faculty participants to review and offer modifications. The researcher made modifications
based on their feedback. In this case, participants verified the accuracy of their narratives
and confirm the trustworthiness of the re-storying. For this inquiry, triangulation
included: data (i.e. field texts, transcripts), research methods, and the credibility and
dependability of the investigator (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000; Creswell, 2007). This
combination of procedures, established to ensure trustworthiness and validity to align
with the options espoused by Clandinin & Connelly (2000) and Creswell (2007).
Protection of Human Subjects
The Institutional Review Boards (IRB) at both Northeastern and Narrative
Universities thoroughly examined and approved the research design to ensure that the
protection of human subjects was a priority during this research study. In addition, the
researcher successfully completed the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)
training protocol and received the approvals of Northeastern and NU Institutional Review
70
Boards (IRB) for all materials and the research design as required prior to engaging the
NU faculty participants.
To obtain signed informed consent, the researcher reviewed the customized
consent form with the participants and provided an oral explanation, answered questions
and delivered written explanation to all participants prior to beginning the research study.
In addition, it was made clear that there are no foreseeable risks associated with this
research. See the customized informed consent form (Appendix - D) that was shared with
and signed by all participants.
Confidentiality.
Confidentiality was maintained throughout the process and the sole researcher
conducting the study closely guarded all research data. All participants, the institution
and the program were provided with pseudonyms to maintain their anonymity. All data
(i.e. digital recordings and transcriptions) stored on the researcher’s personal, password-
protected computer, are backed-up regularly and will be destroyed upon degree
completion. Signed participant consent forms are secured in a locked file cabinet and will
remain there for three years following the end of study at the home of the researcher and
no one else will have access to them.
At the conclusion of this inquiry the researcher will share the aggregated findings
with all participants. At that point participants will not have an opportunity to modify the
narratives. Their review occurred earlier in the re-storying process and their feedback was
incorporated into the final document.
71
Chapter 5: Report of Research Findings
Narrative University Backstory
Narrative University is a small institution with approximately 2,000 students and
150 faculty members (NU, 2014). The campus is located within thirty minutes of a larger
metropolitan city and school is nestled in a quaint and hip college centric community.
The institution encompasses a relatively large physical space in comparison to the size of
the student body. The architecture includes an equal mix of historical and contemporary
buildings to signify the institution’s past and future.
The focus of this study, the Food Themed Cluster (FTC) at Narrative University
proposes to offer students an opportunity to connect a portion of their general education
courses employing a food theme. The FTC requires students to complete three courses in
three different divisions, attend six food-themed events and participate in an annual
banquet. Beginning in the 2014/15 school year, students will also be required to
complete a Seminar class to intentionally connect across the disciplines. Two professors
will teach the Seminar from different disciplines within the FTC. As a reminder, the
Themed Clusters are optional and are not required for graduation or integrated into the
general education curriculum.
Summary of Findings
The purpose of this study was to understand whether, to what extent, and in what
ways, food could serve as a unifying element in the general education curriculum. To
examine this, the faculty members involved in the Food Themed Cluster (FTC) at
72
Narrative University (NU) were asked to share their stories and to give their perceptions
about the rationale, implementation and outcomes in the Food Themed Cluster. 1 The
question that guided this research was: How do faculty members teaching in the Food
Themed Cluster at Narrative University perceive its rationale, implementation and
outcomes?
The findings of this study are focused on three primary themes: the challenges of
integrating the FTC into the general education curriculum, interdisciplinarily pedagogy
and student participation and retention in the program, and food as a unifying theme.
Overall the faculty participants’ perceptions indicate that the FTC has been a
successful collaboration between the NU administration and the faculty who have
volunteered to participate in this initiative. The NU administration presented a framework
for The NU Themed Course Clusters Network and the faculty took ownership and
created an innovative curriculum without adding new courses or additional faculty. The
FTC is an additional layer that may complement the general education requirements for
students interested in connecting a portion of their core courses with a food-themed
curriculum. Participant responses indicated that in general, the administration and faculty
1As a caveat, Dr. Environmental Science noted that the primary intent of the FTC,
to date, has not been to address general education requirements specifically although it
has been offered as a way to meet some of the general education requirements (Personal
Correspondence, May 17, 2014).
73
appear to be satisfied with the trajectory of this new initiative, which they also note, is
still in its infancy. The Food Themed Cluster program coordinators were instrumental in
organizing and shepherding this food-themed curriculum through institutional
governance channels.
Anecdotally, students who have participated and completed the FTC are also
pleased with the outcomes and found their experiences valuable and worthwhile. Yet, the
research participants suggest that the program struggles with student recruitment,
retention and completion of the program and they are working to address these issues to
continually improve the program. In addition, they were all enthusiastic about integrating
food into the curriculum as a unifying theme to engage students, make connections and
improve learning outcomes.
Participant Introductions
These six professors in the Food Themed Cluster (FTC) represent five different
disciplines. All are tenured. Four of the contributors are women, two are men, three are
coordinators of the FTC program and all volunteered to teach in this Food Themed
Cluster. Three of the participants teach in a second Themed Cluster in addition to the
FTC. This provided an additional layer of perspective as each Thematic Cluster is
organized and pedagogically modeled in a unique manner with differing requirements for
completion. Collectively they have taught at NU for 97 years. The professors are
introduced in the order in which they interviewed.
Dr. Environmental Science, Ph.D. is the chair of the Environmental Science
Department and has been the primary contact and host of the researcher at NU. He was
74
instrumental in assisting the researcher with coordinating this study throughout the
process. In addition, Dr. Environmental Science is one of the three coordinators of the
Food Themed Cluster. This additional responsibility started in fall 2013 and he has been
teaching at NU for seven years.
Dr. Physics II, Ph.D. is a professor in the Physics Department at NU. He has been
at NU for twelve years and has been teaching in the Food Themed Cluster for three years.
For him, food is an academic topic and an avocation and “it’s an effective way to teach
certain physics topics” (Dr. Physics II, information sheet, p.1).
Dr. Literature, Ph.D. is a professor in the Literature Department. For twenty-six
years she has taught at NU. Since 2011 Dr. Literature has volunteered to be involved with
the Food Themed Cluster as part of the faculty collaborating on the NU Connection and
various components of this institution-wide initiative. Food is more of an academic
interest than an avocation for her. In addition, Dr. Literature also teaches in one of the
other Themed Clusters.
Dr. English, Ph.D. is a member of the English Department. She considers food
both an academic area of interest and an avocation and has been teaching in the Food
Themed Cluster since its inception. Dr. English has been on the faculty at NU for twenty-
nine years and also teaches in another Themed Cluster.
Dr. Physics I, Ph.D. is one of the founding coordinators of the Food Themed
Cluster and is a faculty member in the Physics department. She has been employed at NU
for thirteen years. For Dr. Physics I, food is primarily an academic topic and she is
“excited to work with faculty and students on complex, multi-disciplinary problems” (Dr.
75
Physics I, information sheet, p.1). In addition, Dr. Physics I also teaches in a second
Themed Cluster.
Dr. Sociology, Ph.D. is a founding coordinator of the Food Themed Cluster. She
is a member of the Sociology Department. For ten years Dr. Sociology has been a faculty
member at NU and considers food both an academic and avocational interest. Her reason
for joining the Food Themed Cluster is that she thought it would be “energizing and a
good way to interact with other faculty” (Dr. Sociology, info. sheet, p.1).
Participant Perceptions
Rationale.
None of the participants interviewed indicated remembering a clear path for how
the initial Themed Clusters Network idea evolved. The summer 2010 meeting initiated by
administrators requested participation from interested faculty and was confirmed as the
starting point from their perspective. It is unclear exactly where the idea of cross-
disciplinary Clusters came from although it was the prompt for the first gathering. At the
preliminary meeting several of the study participants proposed food as an ideal thematic
topic for a Themed Cluster.
NU general education – then and now.
Prior to the introduction of the new Themed Course Clusters Network (TCCN),
general education at NU was a traditional distribution curriculum typical of a liberal arts
institution. It required a prescribed number of courses from the natural
sciences/mathematics, social sciences, humanities and the arts disciplines. In addition,
there were competency requirements in English, a foreign language, writing, cultural
76
diversity and quantitative reasoning. It is similar to other peer liberal arts institutions with
whom NU was competing with for students. This curriculum was included in the review
by consultants who cited a lack of differentiation for the institution. Currently, the NU
Themed Course Clusters Network is layered on top of the current general education
curriculum according to study participants.
The NU participant interviews indicated that the prompt to review and enhance
the curriculum was initiated by the administration (they didn’t specifically cite declining
enrollments as the impetus) based on feedback from consultants, while the solutions were
faculty-driven. Dr. Physics I noted that one of the findings of the external consultants was
that the “current curriculum lacked innovation” (p.5). Faculty members involved in the
creation of the Thematic Clusters were enthusiastic about being a part of this initiative to
create the innovative cross-disciplinary FTC. Participants offered a variety of reasons for
the new NU Themed Course Clusters Network of which FTC was one of the components:
“How can we get better? How can we improve on what we’re already doing?” (Dr.
Physics II, p.3).
As noted, the NU Themed Course Clusters Network continues to exist alongside
the general education curriculum. According to the participants, courses can also be
double counted to meet multiple requirements and this often creates confusion for
students and challenges for the study participants when they are advising. All professors
at Narrative University also provide advising to students.
According to Dr. Literature, general education at NU is “unchanged” since the
addition of the Themed Course Clusters Network (p.1). The “new” curriculum “sits on
top” (Dr. Physics II, p.9), “floats above” (Dr. Environmental Science, p.1), is “just an
77
add-on at this point” (Dr. Physics I, p. 12) and it “overlies general education” (Dr.
Sociology, p.3). Further comments note that FTC was “meant to enhance, not replace”
NU general education requirements (Dr. Environmental Science, p.2) and Dr. Sociology
sees general education and FTC as “complementary” (p. 3).
We “assumed students were making interdisciplinary connections [across the
general education curriculum] but it was not happening” (Dr. Environmental Science,
p.9). The new FTC was intended to help students by “creating a space to do this in the
form of a topical collection” (Dr. Physics II, p.1). It was also designed to “study complex
problems…e.g. obesity, sustainability, environmental… from different disciplines” (Dr.
Physics I, p. 1) and some students “needed help to relate some of their general education
courses…and FTC could provide scaffolding” (Dr. Physics II, pp. 1-2).
Drs. Physics I and Sociology volunteered to be the founding coordinators of the
Food Themed Cluster and were credited by their fellow FTC colleagues as organizing
and shepherding this themed curriculum to fruition. Dr. Environmental Science was
invited to join the FTC coordinators in fall 2013 to assist with the many extracurricular
activities including speakers and field trips in this Food Themed Cluster.
The faculty participants’ findings indicate that the rationale for the NU Themed
Course Clusters Network in general was seeking a “match with the liberal arts and desire
to improve critical and interdisciplinary thinking” (Dr. Environmental Science, personal
communication, May 13, 2014). The administrative rationale for the Themed Course
Clusters Network cited low enrollment concerns and a lack of differentiation as the
prompt for NU to create their innovative curricular enhancements, The NU Themed
Course Clusters Network.
78
Program misgivings.
At some point early in the process, according to Dr. Environmental Science, the
majority of the 140 NU faculty voted to approve a pilot of the NU Themed Course
Clusters Network initiatives. In 2012, there was a second vote to adopt the initiatives as
part of the curriculum. Although there was a majority vote by faculty, there are still some
reservations about the “new” curriculum. Participants shared some concerns of their own
and those of their colleagues during the interviews. Some of the faculty not involved in
the new initiatives are “not sure what on earth we’re doing” (Dr. Sociology, p.15), others
are concerned that it could “detract from the old curriculum” and consider the new
curricular initiatives “too flashy, too trendy…they prefer the current curriculum versus
trying to spin and market NU” in this way (Dr. Sociology, p. 3). Other faculty had
concerns about “how it would be credited… Would it replace general education? How
will it affect my department?” (Dr. Environmental Science, p. 3). Dr. Physics I echoes the
comments of her fellow FTC coordinators noting the “anxiety over the new curriculum,
how it would impact the old general education requirements and the reluctance to change
the old format” emerged as repetitive themes on campus (p. 7). There are questions such
as, “how well does it [the new curriculum] really work… Was it the right way to go” (Dr.
Physics I, p.7)?
Dr. Literature commented that, “the administration has invested significantly in
the new curriculum” (p.22). She voiced her own concerns about the new initiatives,
noting, “ I like the FTC but the new curriculum has created more work for an already
overtaxed faculty” (p.2). To further explain, Dr. Literature shared concerns about
financial choices by the administration, impact on faculty’s time and cited what she calls
79
“curricular minimalism” at NU (p.4). She defined it as having “twenty fewer faculty than
we need campus-wide to offer the curriculum we already offer, not to mention anything
we spread on top of it” (Dr. Literature, p.4). “Adding this other layer of the new
curriculum typically involves courses we’re already teaching, it involves additional
administration, it involves additional meetings, it involves follow-up, paperwork, and it’s
another layer…and faculty governance is being impacted” (Dr. Literature, p. 4).
Dr. English shared some of the same concerns as Dr. Literature. She noted that a
group of faculty members have created an anti-new initiatives blog. One of the questions
they are asking is…how sustainable these new initiatives are. Dr. English is also
concerned about the sustainability of the NU Network. She shared her thoughts on the
significant funding being funneled to the Network: “ it takes away from department
funding and faculty salaries” (p. 4).
Implementation.
The new NU Network launched in 2011 and “about one-third [of the 140 faculty
at NU are involved] in the Themed Course Clusters Network” (Dr. Physics I, p. 7). Drs.
Physics I and Dr. Sociology invited, recruited and organized the faculty teaching in the
FTC. Each of the study participants had a story about how they were connected to the
FTC and the coordinators. Many of the professors teaching in the FTC are friends in
addition to being colleagues. All participants noted that they enjoy collaborating with
each other across the disciplines on this Food Themed Cluster. They are committed to
advancing the program together. Rogers (2003) highlighted the importance of having
“innovation champion (s)” early in a change process (p. 414). This person(s) is especially
80
critical to innovation within organizations and is often not in a senior leadership position
according to Rogers (2003). The combination of key characteristics such as
organizational and collaborative skills combined with influence and credibility among
peers employed by FTC champions Drs. Physics I and Dr. Sociology were instrumental
to the creation and implementation of this Themed Cluster.
Challenges.
The integration of the FTC into general education has been a challenge according
to the faculty interviewed. Dr. Physics II states, “this is where it struggles…FTC is broad,
has many courses and professors” (p. 6). Dr. Physics I concurs, “The lack of integration
with general education is a weakness of the current program” (p. 6). Dr. Sociology notes
that there is “no mandate for students to take Themed Clusters…without this, it won’t be
fully integrated” (p. 5).
Students learn about the NU Network initiatives from a host of sources including:
orientation, NU Themed Course Clusters Network website, marketing materials across
campus, word of mouth, advising sessions and from faculty in class. One interesting point
about faculty advising from Dr. Physics I illustrates some of the challenges for the FTC:
During academic advising sessions I tend to forget to mention the
Thematic Clusters as a particular option. As soon as I am advising a
student I feel very compelled to make sure the students are progressing
towards graduation. They don’t have to take a Themed Cluster to graduate
but they do have to complete their gen ed requirements. I am much more
attentive when I am advising to their requirements for their major and their
gen ed requirements (p. 6-7).
81
Food-themed curriculum.
The faculty involved in the initial call to action for the NU Network said that the
theme of food was presented and “stuck” at the first meeting (Dr. Sociology, p.2). All
faculty interviewed were enthusiastic about food as the theme for this Course Cluster. Dr.
Dr. Literature said, “Food aligned with my research interests in a liberal arts environment.
It helps students make connections ” (p.6). Food is a “great way to bring faculty together
on issues…and…it is a popular topic that everyone has a connection to” (Dr. English,
p.1). It is the ideal topic to “solve bigger problems through multiple disciplines” (Dr.
Environmental Science, p.9). Dr. Physics II considers food “a hook for complex
subjects…a vehicle in…like when you have some awful disease and you need mainline
drugs, they put in a port…[food] is like mainline access…and…can be used to drive
academic enterprise” (p.1). According to Dr. Physics I, “food is an ideal organizing
principle…and incredibly unifying topic across the disciplines” (p.9). “Food is a topic
that students care about…a good start in the education process” (Dr. Sociology, p. 7). Dr.
English suggests, “food is connected with home, nurturing…a metaphor for love, a way
to give, it’s a creative act, a performative act (p.7).
The NU faculty participants also cited food as a topic that students could easily
relate to and this made it an ideal theme in their FTC courses. They also espoused the
multitude of angles where food can connect across the disciplines and with critical real
world issues including: sustainability in the food systems, health and wellness, obesity,
social justice. Respondents contend that food is at the crossroads of theory and practice
and is an important topic to integrate into the curriculum at NU.
82
The personal connections to food and story are reasons that excited Dr. English as
an opportunity to aid in the learning process. As an English professor, she believes
“everyone has a story to tell and maybe it begins at home and how they were nurtured
and food being a very central aspect”(p.7). She also cites the marked growth of interest in
food through dedicated TV networks, numerous prime time shows, feature length
documentaries and best selling non-fiction books used in many college courses.
Pedagogy model.
The study participants suggest that overall the Themed Course Clusters Network
do not have a clear or ultimate goal to be interdisciplinary (i.e. connections among the
disciplines) curriculum and agree that the majority of courses within the FTC are
currently taught multi-disciplinarily (i.e. subjects taught separately around a theme or
topic, not integrated). Drs. English and Dr. Literature are both from disciplines (English
and Literature) that they identify as naturally interdisciplinary. Dr. English states, “ I
think interdisciplinarily” (p. 5) and Dr. Literature notes, “interdisciplinarity is what I do”
(p.9).
Interdisciplinary pedagogy is natural for some disciplines and curricula, however
it is not the common practice for the FTC. During the interviews, one participant noted
“I’m not particularly careful about my use of the term(s) [multi-disciplinary and inter-
disciplinary] ” (Dr. Physics I, p. 10). Dr. Environmental Science said, “ the Food Themed
Cluster is currently being taught multi-disciplinarily” (p. 13). I don’t have a “sense of
interdisciplinarity as the goal of the program although this would benefit students
more…cross-pollination” across the disciplines would offer a start (Dr. Physics II, p. 8).
83
Outcomes.
The 2013/14 academic year marks the third with the NU Themed Course Clusters
Network, so it is still a fairly new undertaking. Dr. Literature envisions the FTC as
“amorphous…it is something that exists in various states at various moments…versus
seeing this as a fixed thing that you change [it’s a]…work in progress” (p.17). “All these
things [new initiatives] have only been around two, or three years…you’re looking at this
at the dawn of the program, so come back and see us in five years” (Dr. Literature, p. 17).
The professors in the study noted how the FTC has already impacted their
teaching. Dr. Physics I tells of a history of teaching her courses “a mile wide and an inch
deep…[noting that] food has added depth to my classes” (p. 6). “Sharing ideas about
teaching, learning and connecting with faculty in different disciplines” has been one of
the benefits of the FTC for Dr. Environmental Science (p.15). For Dr. Sociology, “it has
been an intellectually stimulating” (p.16) and “enriching experience for faculty…we have
a great group of energetic faculty and it is fantastic to work together” (p.9). Dr. Physics I
has used the FTC experiences to “model valuing other disciplines to aid in understanding
why multiple disciplines are needed to solve big problems” (p.11). The opportunity to
focus on current topics that the individual disciplines may not have adopted yet has
positively impacted Dr. English’s teaching.
According to participant interviews, the infrastructure for evaluating of the FTC
does not yet appear to exist, or it hasn’t been tapped, although assessment is something in
which the professors were interested. They cite a lack of technology, time and
administrative reporting requirements as contributors to the missing links on FTC
effectiveness to date. Without assessment in the FTC, they note that it is difficult to
84
know if students are making the connections intended by this new initiative, why the
student completion is low and the reasons behind these outcomes. Dr. Environmental
Science confirms that currently there is “no assessment of why students didn’t finish [the
FTC] (p. 3).
The student response and participation in FTC has been disappointing and
minimal. “Only three students have completed the Food Themed Cluster to date”
according to Dr. Physics I (p.3). All professors interviewed for this study indicated that
this is the principle challenge for this new program and cite student confusion about the
new curriculum in relation to the general education requirements as the primary issue.
Students are not sure what the FTC is, why they should participate and how it relates to
their general education requirements. Participants suggest numerous other reasons for the
lack of participation including: “FTC is one of the more academically rigorous
Clusters…which may be a disincentive” (Dr. English, p.12); “Students wonder what is in
it for them” (Dr. Sociology, p.3); “There are problems with marketing, messaging and
advising [around FTC]” (Dr. Physics II, p. 9); and “although students are interested, they
choose a more direct route” through their distribution requirements (Dr. Environmental
Science, p. 4-5).
Outside of class FTC requirements include events, blog posts and an annual
banquet. These enhancements have also experienced mixed results according to study
participants. The blog posts turned into a “dumping ground” (Dr. Environmental Science,
p. 16) and did not yield the original intention of assessing outcomes. Dr. Sociology
viewed the blogs as “tools to demonstrate multi-disciplinary thought, problem solving,
new idea generation… [However, students were]…not making connections” (p. 10). The
85
banquets were attended by a small but engaged group of students with double the number
of faculty to support the initiative – “the ratio between faculty and students is skewed in
the FTC” (Dr. Environmental Science, p. 28). Dr. Physics I concurs; we have an
“inefficient faculty to student ratio of 8:4” at some events (p. 12).
Impact.
In general, the study participants do not feel the impact on students and the
institution has met expectations to date. Conversely, they are in agreement that the impact
on faculty involved in the FTC has been extremely positive. Dr. Physics II commented,
“The Food Themed Cluster right now it’s pretty neutral. I don’t see it as really having
driven much change” (p. 13). The impact of the FTC is “not as expected, probably just
policies or something getting in the way” (Dr. Environmental Science, p. 28). “That’s
very exciting…the fact that I can work with common purpose with [other faculty] …that
have nothing to do with my discipline whatsoever, I find this really satisfying and really
interesting…intellectually stimulating” (Dr. Physics I, p. 13). As an example of impact on
faculty, Dr. Physics I explained:
There was a talk given on another Program at NU. We co-sponsored it as
part of the Food Cluster. It was really interesting. There were other
students there that wouldn’t have been there. That was one of the best
moments of the Food Cluster for me really being in a discussion format
that I’ve never been in before. I learned a lot so I think faculty can really
learn from this. I think the Mellon Grant actually has highlighted this point.
The Mellon Foundation was interested in this [funding choice] because of
86
its opportunities for faculty engagement and development, not just
students (Dr. Physics I, p. 13).
Feedback from students.
The professors interviewed for this study indicated that students are confused
about what Themed Clusters are, why they should take them, and how they are integrated
with general education (or not). Dr. Literature wonders, “How can the new curriculum be
an attractant if students are not participating. Where is the disconnect” (p. 20)? Dr.
Environmental Science suggests, “we need to find a better way to do what we say we’re
doing (p.28)…and [provide] better messaging” (p.24). He also recommends, “Developing
ways for students to understand, participate and complete the FTC” (p. 22). Feedback
from FTC participants say “they find it valuable – it gets them to think more deeply about
a topic they’re interested in” (Dr. Sociology, p. 15).
The researcher had an opportunity to participate in a private Admissions Office
tour given by an upper-class student while conducting research on campus. During the
tour the student shared her impressions of the Themed Course Clusters Network. She said,
“I just don’t get it and I’m not clear on the benefits of the programs” (anonymous). Later,
during the research site visit, one of the study participants confirmed that this student was
one of NU’s most engaged and involved students.
Innovation.
Rogers (2003) defines and innovation as “an idea, practice, or object perceived as
new by an individual or other unit of adoption (p. 36). The study participants shared their
87
perspectives regarding the innovativeness of the Food Themed Cluster: “The fact that it
[the FTC] exists is funded and supported by faculty and the administration [makes it
innovative]” (Dr. Environmental Science, p. 25). Having the opportunity to offer a
“creative curriculum [that is] allowed to generate its own momentum” is innovative (Dr.
Environmental Science, p. 26). Dr. Literature notes, “People here think outside the box –
connect across disciplines (p.12)…[Themed Clusters] are an “old idea that is new to NU”
(p. 20). There is a “value we have seen…it’s been innovative for this campus to meet
regularly with people in other disciplines and talk about curriculum…that’s new here”
(Dr. Physics II, p. 13).
Opportunities
The FTC faculty members have made modifications to the program since its
inception in 2011 based on feedback, observations and outcomes. The program is viewed
by coordinators in phases: Phase I – 2011/12; Phase II – 2012/13; Phase III – 2013/14;
Phase IV – 2014/15 and Phase V – 2015/16. In the first phase, the FTC requirements
included four courses, six events with accompanying blog posts and attendance at the
banquet. Phase III added the third coordinator (Dr. Environmental Science) and was
modified to three courses, six events and an annual banquet (blogs posts were deleted).
Phase III and Phase IV remain the same and Phase V is scheduled to add a seminar taught
by two Food Themed Cluster faculty members to intentionally connect the courses. The
Food Themed Cluster is at an early stage in its development and participants still very
much consider it a work in progress.
88
In the future, Dr. Physics I “would like to see the Themed Clusters integrated into
the general education curriculum” (p. 7). Dr. Environmental Science agrees: “maybe FTC
could be a different path to [meet] general education requirements…[in the meantime
we’ll] keep working on FTC to continually improve” (p. 11).
Each of the Themed Clusters is organized in a different way. Some are closely
linked and have fewer classes and professors, while others, like FTC, offer a large
number of courses taught through a diverse group of disciplines. While experimenting
with the pedagogy model, the FTC coordinators shared the story of one modification to
the program that was unsuccessful in the FTC. They created an offering of three courses
in the FTC that did not include any choice for students. This model did not resonate with
students. According to Dr. Environmental Science “zero students responded” to the
prescribed Food Themed Cluster option and the FTC coordinators quickly discarded that
idea and returned to the current model with many courses offered across the disciplines
(Dr. Environmental Science, p. 21).
Wisdom to Share
When asked what advice they would give to other institutions considering a
similar model or if they would do anything differently in hindsight there were several
critical pieces of wisdom shared. Dr. Sociology “would have added the seminar at the
start to more tightly connect” the FTC (p. 14). This professor also noted “it would be
really important to be clear both institutionally then directly with students about what
incentive there is for the students to participate [in FTC] (p.14). Dr. Environmental
89
Science said any institution considering a similar curriculum “must be thoughtful about
integrating FTC into general education” (p. 19).
Other participants recommend: “Get funding, try pilots and secure faculty support”
(Dr. English, p. 15). Dr. Physics I agrees, “Get started, see what works, modify, learn –
experiment first” (p.12). A suggestion from Dr. Environmental Science includes “making
the whole [NU Network] more synergistic linking Themed Clusters to the other [NU
Network] initiatives” (p.24). He also proposes considering the “structure, risk and value
to all stakeholders” (Dr. Environmental Science, p. 18). Drs. Physics II and
Environmental Science highly recommend establishing infrastructure to collect and
assess program related data. (p. 11 and 22).
Emergent Themes
Clandinin & Connelly (2000) suggest, “An inquirer composing a research text
looks for the patterns, narrative threads, tensions, and themes either within or across an
individual’s experience and in the social setting” (p. 132). This recommendation guided
the creation of emergent themes during the journey from the field to developing research
texts.
The emergent themes for this inquiry were a compilation of prompts from the
interview questions and those that arose from the study participants’ stories and the
coding process. Five different disciplines are represented in these narratives and the six
participants exemplify approximately one fourth of the faculty teaching in the FTC. Often
the theme was not explicitly identified but rather the subject matter and topics emerged
through discussions with the FTC faculty participants while in the field.
90
The faculty members in the FTC appear to be the most highly engaged group of
stakeholders in this initiative according to feedback from those who participated in the
study. Their teaching and learning have been significantly impacted by their involvement
in the FTC. They cite their regular interactions with colleagues from other disciplines as
an enriching and intellectually stimulating experience. The faculty engagement related to
the FTC collectively garnered one of the most positive and enthusiastic responses during
the study. Based on the stories shared by the FTC faculty who participated, the best part
of this whole academic initiative has been the cross-disciplinary collaboration. They cited
their new and enhanced relationships with colleagues as having a significant impact on
their teaching, professional development and student learning within their individual
food-themed classes.
External supporters could include the surrounding community and the Mellon
Foundation that provided the initial funding to create the NU Network. Several of the
study participants mentioned the local community during their interviews. Dr.
Environmental Science suggested that if there were a larger cohort of students
participating in the FTC it would be nice to be able to coordinate and mobilize them to
assist with community driven food-centric initiatives and aid in maintaining a good
town/gown relationship with student contributions. He also would like to see a service-
learning component grow out of the FTC to expand on the opportunities for turning
theory into practice in the neighborhood. In addition, Dr. Physics II noted in his interview
that food presents a significant opportunity for community building on and off campus.
He suggests, “ there may be something specific about the food connection and the
capacity to build community around food” (p. 14). There are “huge opportunities” to
91
create impact on the institutional and local communities and “affinity for the
students…the institution” and surrounding community (p. 14).
The institution as a whole touts the new NU Network as its primary differentiator
through marketing materials, messaging and other media compared to other institutions.
Again, while not explicitly examined during the participant interviews there were no
indications that there were any concerns for the institution its in relation to its branding
efforts or reputation.
Challenges
Integration.
According to the NU Network website description of Themed Clusters:
Themed Course Cluster Networks provide an innovative way for you to
fulfill some of your general distribution requirements while you examine a
topic of interest to you in depth and over several semesters. The networks
allow you to examine an idea, theme, or topic by taking related courses in
several different disciplines. This approach helps you understand the
complexity of big issues. By integrating the perspectives of many different
disciplines, you arrive at a more complete and sophisticated picture of
those issues (NU: Network, 2014).
To date, Themed Clusters have not been integrated into the general education
curriculum at NU. According to study participants the new Themed Clusters are an
“overlay” to the distribution requirements. The new NU Networks are described in a
variety of ways to explain that the previous general education requirements are fully
92
intact and unchanged by the new initiatives. The Food Themed Cluster could possibly be
used to group a portion of general education requirements if students clearly understood
how this could happen and the benefits to them. Currently, study participants describe it
as “floating above” (Dr. Environmental Science, p. 1) which is confusing to students.
Students were described as having trouble understanding the relationship (or not)
between their general education requirements and the optional Themed Course Clusters
and the rationale for participating.
Communication.
While the standard university marketing vehicles exist for the Themed Course
Clusters, such as the website, blogs, admissions marketing materials, and orientation, the
faculty interviewed for this research study suggest that there is still a significant
challenge with messaging and communicating to students (and some members of the
faculty) about the merits, purpose, and logistics of the Food Themed Cluster. According
to study participants, students are confused about what Themed Course Clusters are, how
they relate to general education, if they are required to complete them as part of general
education curriculum, and there is a general lack of understanding about the purpose and
reason for students to engage in this new initiative.
Program misgivings.
Approximately one third of the 140 NU faculty members are teaching in the
Themed Course Clusters and a majority voted to support the new curricular initiatives.
Despite this, there are some misgivings about the new initiatives per the majority of the
study participants.
93
Dr. Literature understood the call for new initiatives as “a critical enhancement
for the growth of NU” (p.20). Although she is excited about teaching in two Themed
Clusters, she indicates that NU “responded quickly” to the consultant’s report (Dr.
Literature, p.20). Other participants note concerns from their colleagues about the merits
of the new curriculum, its outcomes, and alignment with institutional mission. These
program misgivings highlight one of the limitations of the DoI theory. The assumption
that an innovation is automatically good, should be diffused and adopted as presented
creates a pro-innovation bias. Rogers (2003) noted that a pro-innovation bias is prevalent
in diffusion research. He also suggests that it is important to understand why an
innovation doesn’t diffuse, where is stalls or in which adopter categories.
Multi-disciplinary and inter-disciplinary pedagogies.
During the ‘lunch and learn’ organized by Dr. Environmental Science the five
Themed Clusters faculty members spoke about the differences between multi-disciplinary
and inter-disciplinary pedagogies. They concurred that there was confusion between the
two definitions and that there was not a clear sense that interdisciplinarity was the goal of
this initiative. The terms that were employed and seemed to resonate more with the
participants and lunch group were: cross-disciplinary, cross-pollination and connections.
Faculty engagement.
The faculty engagement component of the FTC collectively garnered one of the
most positive and enthusiastic responses during the study. Based on the stories shared by
the FTC faculty who participated the best part of this whole academic adventure has been
the cross-disciplinary collaboration. They cited their new relationships with colleagues as
94
having a significant impact on their teaching, professional development and student
learning in their respective food themed courses.
Support systems.
Concerns with the proper infrastructure to support these new and innovative
initiatives were echoed throughout the participant interviews. The support systems that
appeared to require attention were: technology and the ability to easily track courses for
students in the FTC and add the FTC designation to their transcript upon completion. In
addition, there were significant concerns from participants regarding the lack of
evaluation (and resources to do this) of the program to date. Faculty wondered why
students did not join or complete the FTC but only had anecdotal feedback to make
assumptions about the reasoning. NU has dedicated significant resources to the ‘new
curriculum’ according to those interviewed although the program outcomes have yet to
be evaluated collectively. Study participants were interested in student feedback
regarding the FTC but were not able to access this data yet due to infrastructure, time and
resource constraints. They all acknowledged that this information would be valuable for
the FTC to create the continuous improvement that they were committed to and for the
program in which they are fully vested.
Participant Closing Thoughts
One of the closing thoughts from Dr. Physics II seemed to capture the overall
feelings of this FTC initiative at this point. He believes:
Experiments are good. I think in higher education we need to do a lot
more and more often and be willing to fail and try things and quit them if
95
they don’t work and collect data on what’s working and what isn’t (Dr.
Physics II, p. 11).
Findings Conclusion
As the story and restorying of the NU faculty member perceptions of the rationale,
implementation and outcomes unfolded, the narrative methodological framework guided
by the research question created a chronology for this initiative happening at a point in
time during the evolution of the FTC. There were confirmations of pre-existing notions,
differences between theory and practice regarding the FTC and a number of
complications revealed in pursuit of a new and innovative thematic curriculum at NU.
They all felt strongly that food is an ideal topic to engage students and provide context
with more complex material based in what they experienced in their classes. They also
agreed that food has the potential to connect disparate disciplines that comprise the
general education curriculum although that was not witnessed in this study. In addition,
each participant understood and articulated the innovativeness of this unique curricular
enhancement for NU.
In addition, several opportunities emerged from participants during the research.
Their insights provided a deeper understanding of their perceptions and focused on
several key areas including: the lack of integration of the FTC with general education;
communication challenges with students and faculty; misgivings about the new
curriculum from students and faculty; the use of interdisciplinary pedagogy in FTC;
infrastructure and assessment.
This narrative inquiry offered insights and a deeper understanding of the NU
study participant’s perceptions about the evolution of the relatively new FTC. They are
96
all fully committed to the food-themed initiative, cite the challenges of creating and
implementing a new curriculum, and collectively share a passion for teaching,
collaboration across the disciplines and continuous improvement in the FTC.
97
Chapter 6: Discussion of Research Findings
This research explored whether, and if so how, food served as a unifying, and/or
integrative element in the general education curriculum. To examine this, the faculty
study participants teaching in the Food Themed Clusters (FTC) at Narrative University
shared their stories through a narrative inquiry methodology. They communicated their
perceptions about the rationale, implementation and outcomes of their food-themed
curriculum. The NU faculty participants reviewed the findings that were restoried by the
researcher from their interviews in alignment with the methodology. They had the
opportunity to offer modifications to their narratives to assure they were represented as
they intended. This study employed the diffusion of innovations theory to provide a
framework for the research and offer insights into whether and how disparate groups
come together to create innovative solutions and discover how those solutions spread.
As the literature cautioned, attempts to change general education curricula would
be challenging (and changing general education was not the priority for NU) (Bok, 2013;
Christensen & Eyring, 2011; Menand, 2010;Nelson-Laird, et al., 2009;Wehlburg, 2010).
In addition, Kirschner (2012) argued that innovation in higher education is difficult even
for the most committed administrators and faculty. Unfortunately, NU was not immune to
some of the trials of curricular reform attempts. Although the literature and study
participants agree that a food theme may aid in creating engaging, connective courses,
there are challenges with integration into general education and linking courses
interdisciplinarily (Boning, 2007; Huber & Hutchings, 2009; Menand, 2010).
98
The research question that this study sought to answer was: How do faculty
members teaching in the Food Themed Cluster at Narrative University perceive its
rationale, implementation and outcomes?
This chapter is organized in the following manner. First, the overall findings of
the study are synthesized and then analyzed. Next, the common themes that emerged
from the research are examined in relation to the theoretical framework, literature review
and research design. This illustrates how each component came together to create a
holistic (deeper) understanding of the problem of practice and how it evolved during this
study. Then, the implications for general education, innovation and food in the
curriculum are followed by recommendations for future research and concluding
thoughts.
Emergent Themes
Three primary themes that emerged from the participants’ perceptions of the
rationale, implementation and outcomes of the Food Themed Clusters (FTC) at Narrative
University: (1) innovation in the curriculum is challenging; (2) food is a powerful theme;
(3) the importance and limits of faculty ownership/shared governance.
Innovation Challenges.
There were several challenges identified by study participants during the narrative
inquiry. Creating a Food Themed Cluster was an innovative idea. However, study
participants identified several challenges while implementing their new curricular
enhancement. This initiative encountered some of the long-standing issues that exist in
higher education when attempting to modify the curriculum (Bok, 2016; 2013;
99
Christensen & Eyring, 2011; Mirabella & Baulkin, 2011; Mrig, 2013). First, the FTC was
an overlay for the general education requirements, not intentionally integrated or required
for degree completion. While some of the courses could serve a dual purpose and fulfill
both the FTC and general education requirements this was unclear to students and
contributed to their confusion about the benefits of participating in the Themed Course
Clusters Network.
Study participants also cited the lack of integration of the FTC into the general
education distribution requirements as a challenge for this program. Since the general
education curriculum has not changed the benefits for students to add the new FTC
overlay to their already significant academic requirements is unclear to them. Although
the FTC offers an alternative path for students to complete some of their distribution
requirements it appears that they have trouble understanding the benefits, navigating and
completing this Themed Cluster. There are also some reservations from faculty on the
merits of the new curriculum and its impact on general education, their departments,
institutional finances and faculty salaries. The reluctance to disrupt the general education
curriculum is a common challenge when attempting to innovate in higher education. Bok
(2013) and Menand (2010) both highlight the political considerations in the academy that
can often stall or halt curricular reform especially in general education where numerous
disciplines are impacted.
According to participants, their students experienced confusion regarding the
requirements of the FTC, how it relates to general education and the rationale for
participation. This study’s participants see the confusion and lack of understanding
surrounding the FTC as connected to communication challenges across the institutional
100
spectrum. Lattuca & Stark (2009) highlight the necessity for communication in the
diffusion process especially “when adding an academic program in order to remain
competitive with peer institutions” as is the case with NU (p.306). Part of this confusion
is related to communication between the institution, faculty and students. Respondents
noted that the Themed Clusters were marketed and communication via the university’s
website, admission’s brochures and introduced at orientation. Despite the traditional
avenues of communication, participants suggested that even if students had heard of FTC
they were confused about its purpose and benefit to them. Furthermore, in the study
participants’ roles as advisors they often prioritized completion of NU’s distribution
requirements instead of mentioning or encouraging participation in the FTC. Faculty
study participants also said they forgot to talk about the FTC in their classes. Rogers
(2003) argued that for an innovation to spread, communication is critical. At NU,
communication among faculty was effective and did diffuse to create the FTC.
Unfortunately, it was not effective for students based on minimal participation and
program completion to date.
For many decades, higher education has been the target of numerous insiders for a
lack of innovation in part due to its general resistance to change (Anonymous, 2013; Bok,
2013; Christensen & Eyring; 2011; Kirschner, 2012; Menand, 2010). In the past decade,
some of the top-ranked institutions in the country have started to integrated food into the
curriculum.
Integrating food into single courses in the curriculum is an innovative idea that is
in practice at Harvard, Yale, Stanford, UC Berkley and many others (Bonnekessen, 2010;
Duster & Waters, 2006; Pollan, 2010; Spiegel 2012). NU created the Themed Course
101
Clusters Network to help address the declining enrollment issues, a lack of innovation in
the curriculum and to create differentiating points from its peers. The Themed Clusters
were proposed by the administration and championed by the FTC coordinators (Rogers,
2003).
While interdisciplinarity in the twenty-first-century has received significant
attention in theory, the practice of “teaching and scholarship that bring together methods
and material from more than one academic discipline” is challenging (Menand, 2010,
p.95). The academic structure of siloed disciplines contributes to the difficulties with
interdisciplinarity (i.e. connections among the disciplines) pedagogy (Bok, 2013). At this
time, the FTC is mostly taught multidisciplinarily (i.e. subjects taught separately around a
theme or topic, not integrated). Study participants indicate that although they believe
students would learn best from an interdisciplinary curriculum that was not the
institutional directive for this program and that model has been difficult to operationalize
(Menand, 2010).
The most significant challenges for the FTC have been a lack of integration into
general education, student confusion and communication issues to explain the purpose
and benefits of the new curriculum. These issues are closely related and have created
barriers to student participation and retention in the FTC.
The power of food as a theme.
The purpose of this study was to understand whether, and if so how food could
serve as a unifying element in the general education curriculum and the findings were
mixed. According to participant feedback, the theme of food provides many opportunities
to improve learning and engage students while studying significant real-world problems
102
through multiple disciplines (e.g. Harvard, Yale, Stanford, UC-Berkeley). Participants
believe that although the group of students participating is small they are highly engaged.
Since the FTC has not been explicitly integrated into general education it is also
impossible to assess what type of impact it may have in the long run.
Some of the most enthusiastic and passionate responses from study participants
were those narratives that explained why food was chosen as one of the themes for the
Clusters. For two thirds of the participants food was both an academic interest and an
avocation for them. The other third of interviewees identified more with the academic
properties of food as their primary focus. These outcomes did not align with similar
disciplines but instead were more personal.
The limitations of faculty ownership and shared governance.
The model of shared governance and faculty ownership at NU appeared to
function well according to study participants. This could have been a theme but it was not
within the scope of this research. Instead, it would be recommended as a topic for future
research.
Findings in Relation to the Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework employed for this research study was the diffusion of
innovations (DoI) theory. This study was guided in particular by the work of pre-eminent
DoI theorist, E.M. Rogers (2003) who defines diffusion as “the process by which an
innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a
social system” (p. 35). A social system is identified as “a set of interrelated units that are
engaged in joint problem solving to accomplish a common goal” (Rogers, 2003, p. 23).
103
One of the most significant social systems is a higher education institution (Pervin, 1967).
The key elements of diffusion (i.e. innovation, communication, channels, time) were
prominently exhibited throughout this study and illuminated the analysis of the findings.
Prior to the site visit and narrative inquiry being conducted it was unclear how/if the
theoretical framework would benefit this study. The DoI theory provided understanding
of the outcomes experienced at NU in the FTC.
The findings indicate that members of the NU “social system” were engaged
across disciplines to work towards the common goal of creating and implementing
Themed Clusters to aid their students in making intentional links between theory and
practice. The channels of communication used to invite all interested faculty to
participate in the new initiative were initiated by the NU administration. Rogers (2003)
describes this top-down model as a “centralized diffusion system” which is hierarchical
in nature (p. 394). While the FTC started as a centralized diffusion system, the findings
indicated that it morphed into a “decentralized diffusion system” (i.e. spread horizontally)
(Rogers, 2003, p. 395).
According to the study participants, approximately one third of the 140 NU
faculty members participate in the different Themed Clusters. Once food was identified
as one of the Themed Clusters, Drs. Physics I and Sociology used their professional and
personal connections to invite faculty to be part of the Food Themed Clusters. According
to Rogers (2003), they filled multiple roles in the diffusion process including “champions”
(i.e. support innovation despite resistance) (p. 414) and “opinion leadership” (i.e.
informal influence) (p. 27). In addition, based on the DoI theory, they would be
categorized as early adopters (i.e. respected, local opinion leaders) in this process and
104
aided in both the innovation and the diffusion among the faculty in the FTC (Rogers,
2003, p.283).
As highlighted in Rogers (2003), “time is an important methodological enemy in
studying a process such as diffusion” (p. 126). Participant recall lacked specific dates
regarding the timeline for The NU Network, the Themed Clusters and the Food Themed
Cluster adoption. Without the dates it is unclear exactly who adopted to which element(s)
of the FTC and when. In addition, the interviews with study participants did not yield
data that could definitively identify adopter categories. However, the field texts and
transcripts did offer some clues to guide assumptions regarding how those involved may
be categorized. In general, the majority of narratives described the administration as the
innovator, the FTC coordinators and several others as early adopters and the remaining
participants as early majority. Another interpretation of the data within the same group
of participants and non-participating faculty indicated characteristics of late majority and
laggard (i.e., participating, but skeptical and displaying a degree of resistance). Based on
their rate of adoption (i.e. speed of innovation implementation) in the FTC innovation,
the innovators in this case appeared to be a combination of administrators and convening
faculty who created curricular enhancements to differentiate NU and aid students in
making intentional connections between theory and practice (Rogers, 2003). Lattuca &
Stark (2009) also included the DoI theory in their explanation of how curricular change
does (or does not) occur. They cite the importance of both the internal and external
influences on curricular change, which figured prominently in the NU curricular
initiatives (Lattuca & Stark, 2009). Faculty members that neither voted to adopt the new
curriculum nor are vocally resistant are likely part of the late majority or laggard
105
categories. Participants described feedback from colleagues that would be considered late
majority, skeptical about the new curriculum and the laggards who are typically
identified as traditional but in this case may also be part of the resistant contingent of
faculty described by study participants. One study participant described a contingent of
non-participating faculty members who created an anti-NU Network blog to share their
opposition and skeptical views of these new initiatives. This group “who were greatly
oppositional” (Dr. English, p.4) questions, “how sustainable it [the new NU curricular
initiatives] is” (Dr. English, p. 4)?
Another element of the DoI theory that was exhibited in the NU FTC study was
the idea of re-invention. According to Rogers (2003), early diffusion studies meant
replicating the innovation. More often, re-invention of an innovation occurs when “the
new idea changes and evolves during the diffusion process as it moves from adopter to
adopter” (Rogers, 2003, p. 180). The participant narratives revealed a significant amount
of re-invention of the FTC and individual courses, by discipline and extra- curricular
requirements since the program’s inception as noted in Chapter 5. In addition, each of the
Themed Clusters is intentionally organized and modeled differently offering opportunity
for sharing and learning across the Clusters. Half of the respondents teach in two of the
Themed Clusters and they indicated that the differences between the Clusters offered
opportunities for growth, experimentation and collaborations.
The analysis of findings for this study were more clearly understood in part due to
the DoI theoretical components including the “attributes of innovations” (i.e. relative
advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability and observability) – to help explain
different rates of adoption (Rogers, 2003, p. 15). An institutions considering curricular
106
change they may benefit from integrating the DoI elements into their implementation
plans pre-emptively to understand some of the fundamentals that are necessary for an
innovation to diffuse (Lattuca & Stark, 2009).
The majority of participants felt the new curriculum could enhance the general
education and yet the institution was cautious and chose a low risk innovation model by
maintaining the distribution requirements. NU did not add any new courses and instead
created the Themed Clusters as an overlay to general education. Several participants felt
that general education was being eroded by the new curriculum and therefore may not
have clearly identified with the “relative advantage” of the new curriculum. Rogers
(2003) defined relative advantage as “The degree to which an innovation is perceived
better than the idea it supersedes” (p. 15).
The majority of the general education literature supports the numerous advantages
of an integrated (i.e. thematic, interdisciplinary, connections between theory and practice)
curriculum (Huber & Hutchings, 2009; Kurland, et al., 2010; Mirabella & Balkun, 2011)
and also the general resistance to change in higher education and in general education
specifically (Awbrey, 2005; Bok, 2013; Christensen & Eyring, 2011; Fuess & Mitchell,
2011).
The FTC meets the needs of the adopters interviewed as it aligns with their
interests in food as research, an avocation and/or academic endeavor. Trying new things
energized most participants and others found the FTC interactions to be intellectually
stimulating. The idea of connecting courses around a theme is not completely new to NU
or to higher education. For respondents and the institution, the new curriculum was
compatible and “consistent with the existing values, past experiences, and needs of
107
potential adopters” (Rogers, 2003, p. 15). The alignment with institutional goals and
objectives was beneficial for the NU Network initiatives and contributed to the swift rate
of adoption among faculty participating in the study (Fuess & Mitchell, 2011; Nelson-
Laird, et al., 2009; Pace, et al., 2010).
DoI theory offered insights into the confusion students were experiencing in the
FTC. The complexity of the program (i.e. lack of integration into general education, lack
of clarity about benefits, communication issues) significantly impacted the participation,
retention and completion of the FTC to date. Because the merits of the FTC were
difficult for students to understand their participation was negatively impacted (Rogers,
2003). The literature indicates that some students are resistant to or dissatisfied with
general education (Fuess & Mitchell, 2011; Lazerson, 2010; Wehlburg, 2010) and adding
to that with a new curriculum that is difficult to use has yielded only three students
completing the FTC to date.
Study participants have been able to make adjustments (i.e. re-invention) to the
curriculum in each phase of the program as they test the FTC. Rogers (2003) also credits
the “trialability, the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a
limited basis” (p. 16) as a key element in diffusion of an innovation. The trialability has
worked well for faculty across the Themed Clusters but it has not translated to student
participation. Perhaps the modifications that participants are making will translate into
student engagement also. Based on participant feedback, diffusion occurred swiftly until
it reached the students at the implementation stage. Several of the trials were beneficial to
the process to allow the institution and faculty to try an innovation without committing to
any changes in general education or the courses that are currently offered. One
108
adjustment that resulted from the “trial” to date is the addition of a Seminar to “stimulate
cross-disciplinary understanding of topics presented in class” (Themed Clusters: Food,
2014).
The observability of the FTC results is both a positive and negative attribute of
this innovation’s rate of adoption. Faculty collaboration on this Food Themed Cluster is
one of its outstanding outcomes, according to participant accounts. However, the lack of
participation by students is a concern for respondents. Due to the small number of
students that have completed the program there may be a void in observability by their
peers. According to Rogers (2003) if an innovation is difficult to “observe or describe to
others” (p. 258) then this can negatively impact the rate of adoption, which was exhibited
in this study.
All theories have their shortcomings, and DoI is no exception. Rogers (2003)
identifies four primary criticisms, two of which appeared in this research study. The pro-
innovation bias is defined as “the implication…that an innovation should be diffused and
adopted by all members of a social system, that it should be diffused more rapidly, and
that the innovation should neither be re-invented nor rejected” (Rogers, 2003, p. 106).
Several participants shared stories about colleagues who questioned their concerns about
the merits and sustainability of the NU Network of curricular innovations. This
implication was an example of pro-innovation bias where a new and innovative idea is
considered good and should not be questioned (Rogers, 2003). As an example, when
participant and non-participant faculty questioned the sustainability of the NU Network,
the financial implications and the merits of the whole program they were probed by
colleagues who were pro- NU Network. Pro-innovation colleagues asked why they
109
wouldn’t fully support the NU Network? Wasn’t it fun? Didn’t they like to explore fun
ideas with students?
Re-call.
Rogers (2003) states, “Time is an important methodological enemy in studying a
process such as diffusion” (p. 126). As noted earlier, time is one of the key components
of DoI. “One weakness of diffusion research is a dependence upon self-reported recall
data from respondents as to their date of adoption of a new idea” (Rogers, 2003, p. 126).
During the interviews participants were asked to recall their perceptions of the FTC
including the history of how it evolved including questions of when each of the following
components started: the first meeting, the NU Network implementation, Themed Clusters
and the FTC? However, Rogers (2003) noted, “hindsight is not completely accurate” (p.
126). When study participants were asked to reconstruct specifics of when, where, why
and how the FTC was created there were some gaps in the details. The majority did not
offer specific dates and those that did share dates noted that they were not sure of their
accuracy. Other field texts (i.e. NU website, marketing publications, letters from the
President) were employed in an attempt to recreate the timeline associated with the
adoption of the FTC. In addition, all participants have validated their restoried narratives
of the findings and had the opportunity to offer modifications.
Findings in Relation to the Literature Review
Three primary threads were explored for this literature review for this study
including: curricular innovation, integration and reform attempts, general education and
food as a unifying theme. Several sub-categories also emerged that also appeared in the
110
study including: impacts of academic culture on innovation, institutional mission
alignment, resistance and coherence. Some of the findings were consistent with the
literature while others contradicted the literature.
Curricular innovation, reform attempts.
The FTC outcomes aligned with several of the innovative curricular models
highlighted in the literature including: “offering a choice of themes to help connect
general education” (Mrig, 2013).
According to the literature, curricular innovation and reform attempts are
typically slow to occur if they are attempted at all (Awbrey, 2005; Christensen & Eyring,
2011; Mirabella & Balkun, 2011). The NU Network curricular enhancements were
created and implemented quite expeditiously (in about one year) because they are an
overlay to general education and did not add any new courses. The NU research findings
contradicted the literature in numerous ways including: the institutions’ willingness to
change, the speed of adoption, the introduction of multiple innovative curricular
enhancements simultaneously, and willingness to adapt curricula as needed. However,
this swiftness of change identified by study participants was enabled by several key NU
decisions including: no new courses added to create the FTC, it is not integrated with
general education and it not mandatory requirement for graduation. Instead, it is an
overlay in relation to the general education curriculum, which has caused confusion for
students about the benefits and role of the FTC in the baccalaureate degree.
In the literature, MacDougall (2000) argued that an interdisciplinary cluster in the
curriculum can improve both faculty and student engagement in general education. At
Narrative University, faculty engagement interdisciplinarily (i.e. connections among the
111
disciplines) in the Food Themed Cluster was high although the courses were mostly
taught multi-disciplinarily (i.e. subjects taught separately around a theme or topic, not
integrated). Participants indicated that students in the FTC found the topic of food
engaging even though it was unclear if they were experiencing it in an interdisciplinary
way. MacDougall (2000) offers hope that institutions and faculty willing to seek new
possibilities to create innovation in the curriculum will reap the rewards of their efforts.
The study respondents did experience positive impact on their teaching and learning
through participation in the FTC.
Integration in general education.
Klein (2005) defines integrative learning as a broad term encompassing “structure,
strategies and activities that bridge divides, such as general education and the major,
introductory and advanced levels, experience inside and outside the classroom, theory
and practice, and disciplines and fields” (p.8). The NU Network’s portfolio overall was
created to address many of these elements. The Food Themed Clusters also align with
numerous “integrative learning” components.
Multi-Disciplinarity.
One study in particular (Kurland, et al., 2010) had similar outcomes when the
faculty implemented a sustainability-themed interdisciplinary (i.e. connections among the
disciplines) curriculum. Like NU, the outcomes at the institution that was the subject of
that study more closely resembled a multidisciplinary (i.e. subjects taught separately
around a theme or topic, not integrated) experience for both faculty and students.
According to the NU study participants, while there was not an explicit directive to teach
112
the FTC interdisciplinarily, that was the original intent. The majority of the faculty
members interviewed said they teach their FTC classes multidisciplinarily and also agree
that an interdisciplinary model would be better for student learning. Several participants
that reported teaching their courses interdisciplinarily attribute that outcome to what they
do naturally because of their disciplines. At the time of the study, most participants
approached food through the lens of his or her discipline. Based on this model, the
students would need to piece together – or integrate – these disparate sets of knowledge
from the various courses themselves. Some students may succeed in this, but others may
not, without guidance. In this respect, the FTC is similar to the general education
curriculum in that it presents a variety of courses, which may or may not add up to an
integrated body of knowledge. If it doesn’t, then for the student, it was just a collection of
courses they completed. If it does, then the student should come away with an
interdisciplinary knowledge about food, but perhaps more importantly, they are trained in
viewing an issue through various lenses, and integrating those perspectives. At the time
of this study a valuable opportunity for the new FTC is not yet fully realized – the food
theme is a engaging and connective topic, but the FTC may not be going as far as
teaching students how to approach a topic by integrating insights from various disciplines,
lenses and perspectives. To more intentionally address the integrative and intentional
connections between theory and practice in the FTC, program coordinators have created a
seminar class to address these concerns that have emanated from the initial phases of the
FTC.
113
Food as a powerful theme.
This literature thread was consistent with the study in finding that food is an
impactful and engaging theme that adds depth and connection in higher education
(Bonnekessen, 2010; Cargill, 2005; Duster & Waters, 2006; Resor, 2010). Each study
participant provided examples of food as a unifying theme in their pedagogy. They
described the food theme as: engaging, an organizing principle, an interesting topic for
students, a subject that exists in all disciplines, adding depth to their teaching, providing
context for more complicated courses, easy to relate to, a topic students care about and
feel comfortable discussing, aligning with their research interests, a great motivator,
naturally interdisciplinary and the perfect connector.
Food was chosen as the theme for the FTC and it works well in individual classes.
For those few students who have completed the FTC the faculty members believe that
they were able to make connections in their individual classes. It was unclear whether or
not students made the connection across their courses and with the extra-curricular FTC
events in the way the program was envisioned. To date, participants suggest that the FTC
outcomes are disappointing due to the limited number of students completing this
Themed Cluster. To address this, FTC coordinators have created a seminar class to more
intentionally connect the FTC and extracurricular events. However, the faculty study
participants indicate that the impact on their teaching and learning has been both
rewarding and intellectually stimulating. For them, food has been a unifying theme to
collaborate across the disciplines.
114
Innovation in the curriculum.
Anonymous (2013) identified an innovative curriculum as a differentiating
element that may attract students and address declining enrollment issues at post-
secondary institutions. NU chose to respond to their decline in enrollment by creating an
innovative collection of curricular enhancements. Study participants commented that the
NU Network, having the full support of administrators, a majority vote from faculty and
outside funding, was “innovative.” Yet, although NU did develop and implement a menu
of new initiatives they did not disrupt the pre-existing general education curriculum or
add any new courses to this effort (see Appendix E). NU chose a model that preserved
the core distribution requirements while experimenting with a variety of 21st century
learning initiatives (i.e. Themed Clusters, Study Abroad, Student Research Grants).
Kirschner (2012) cited several books by higher education insiders that shared
similar conclusions that “academic culture strangles innovation and reform” (p.3).
Institutions committed to maintaining academic tradition may find it difficult to innovate.
Kirschner (2012) also noted, “The hard-working and deeply committed administrators
and faculty…college[s] are not unique in seeking ways to make progress, while still
preserving the status quo” (p.4). This contributes to the existing evidence that there are
significant challenges when attempting to modify the curriculum. NU’s ‘innovative
curriculum’ where the new initiatives are an overlay to the general education
requirements also supports Kirschner’s (2012) contentions (Kurland, et al., 2010,
MacDougall, 2000).
115
Program misgivings.
The literature review indicates some resistance to general education and curricular
change among the faculty members at post-secondary institutions (Awbrey, 2005; Bok,
2006, 2013; Fuess & Mitchell, 2011; Kurland, et al., 2010; Pittendrigh, 2007). In
addition, student dissatisfaction with general education was also evident in the literature
(Christensen & Eyring, 2011; Gaff, 2004; Lazerson, 2010; Wehlburg, 2010). The
majority of concerns about the new curriculum for this study appeared to be more
appropriately characterized as misgivings or reservations instead of resistance. The
concerns that emerged in the study findings focused on several elements for faculty and
students. For faculty, the misgivings were presented in several forms including: a general
confusion for members not participating in the Themed Cluster’s initiative about what it
entailed; the overall merit of the new curriculum; the time requirements (e.g. additional
administration, meetings, follow-up and paperwork) and negative financial impact on
faculty salaries and departmental funding.
Participants indicated that students’ lack of participation and retention in the FTC
might be related to confusion about the program in relation to general education.
Respondents noted that students didn’t understand how the FTC worked with NU’s
distribution requirements, how participation would benefit them or the rationale for their
extra efforts. In addition, participants noted that students did not clearly understand the
benefits of participation in the FTC. Lack of time or interest in trying to add another
element to their undergraduate degree requirements likewise contributed to only a small
number of students who completed the FTC to date. What appeared, as resistance to the
116
FTC may have been a lack of communication with the students or a lack of knowledge of
how to engage with this program?
Gaps in the Literature
The findings of the FTC study confirm the challenges that occur when attempting
to modify or reform the curriculum (Bok, 2013; Menand, 2010; Wehlburg, 2010).
Discussions about how the new curriculum would relate to general education occurred
early in the brainstorming sessions to create the NU Network. There were concerns about
how changes would impact faculty, disciplines and departments. Rather than alter general
education, NU chose to introduce four curricular enhancements without modifying or
intentionally integrating the Themed Clusters into the general education requirements.
Without changing general education or introducing new courses, NU created four new
initiatives to enhance the curriculum to connect theory and practice in about a year. This
rate of adoption, the pace of FTC creation and introduction into the curriculum occurred
individually and institutionally at NU within a relatively short period of time. One of the
key elements of the diffusion process is time (Rogers, 2003). The period from learning
of the innovation to implementation and rate adoption by participants (i.e. faculty and
students) is relevant along the diffusion of innovation continuum (Rogers, 2003).
Creating an overlay to the curriculum at NU instead of modifying it offered the
opportunity for rapid diffusion and adoption for faculty. Students did not have the same
diffusion response. The initial grant funding secured by NU administrators may have
been instrumental in the rate of adoption as it addressed the financial issues that can often
impede the speed of an innovation being implemented (Rogers, 2003).
The faculty members that participated in this study were enthusiastic about
117
creating this food-themed overlay for the general education curriculum. In addition, the
FTC coordinators were critical in choosing the food theme, creating the pedagogical
model for this Themed Cluster, recruiting faculty and implementing this program. Rogers
(2003) described the critical “role of champions” (p.414) as particularly important within
an organization. He further indicated that it was especially important to have a
champion(s) when the innovations are “costly, highly visible, or radical” (Rogers, 2003,
p.414). The FTC aligns with each of those descriptors of an innovation. The NU
champions (i.e. FTC coordinators) collaborated and shepherded the FTC to fruition and
are fully engaged in continually improving the offerings for their students while enjoying
the cross-disciplinary learning they are experiencing. This group of faculty was excited
about new and innovative curricular changes and motivated to participate in the FTC and
collaborate to continually improve it.
Implications
There are two important implications from this study: innovation in the
curriculum and food in higher education.
The research question that this study sought to answer was: How do faculty
members teaching in the Food Themed Cluster at Narrative University perceive its
rationale, implementation and outcomes?
Originally, this study was focused on employing food as a themed to improve the
connection across the collection of disciplines that compose general education. This focus
evolved during the study as Narrative University chose not to modify their general
education curriculum in an effort to develop differentiation among peers, address-
118
declining enrollments and create innovative curricular offerings. Modifying general
education was not the driving force for NU when introducing the NU Network initiatives.
Thus, the problem of practice for this thesis re-focused on the potential for the topic of
food to offer an innovative and unifying element to thematically connect courses across
the disciplines (Cargill, 2005). This study concurred with the challenges present when
attempting to modify the curriculum. Participants identified food as a theme that
collectively interested faculty teaching in the FTC. It also provided an engaging topic for
students in their individual courses to add depth and a common understanding with more
complex subjects but has not yet been able to connect courses across the curriculum.
Narrative University initiated the NU Network in 2011 to help students more
intentionally connect theory and practice. One element of the Themed Clusters initiatives
is the Food Themed Cluster (FTC) and it was the focus of this study. The findings
suggest that NU created the Themed Clusters, a part of the NU Network, to address
decreased enrollments, a lack of innovation in the curriculum and a need for
differentiation among their peers. The FTC was intended to offer students a thematic
option to connect a portion of the general education curriculum through the theme of food.
Although this was the original intent, participants suggest that the FTC has not been
integrated into the general education curriculum, and therefore it is unclear at this
juncture if the theme of food is helping students to connect a portion of their general
education distribution requirements.
Additional challenges
To address declining enrollments and to differentiate among peer institutions, NU
chose to add four curricular enhancements instead of modifying their general education
119
requirements. Participants reported that early in the NU Network planning sessions there
were discussions regarding how the new curriculum would be integrated. Faculty voiced
many concerns about how any change to the general education requirements would
impact them, their departments, budgets and disciplines (Bok, 2013; Lattuca & Stark,
2009; Menand, 2010). Rather than disrupt the general education curriculum, NU chose to
create enhancements to connect course thematically as an overlay to the distribution
requirements.
Implications for other higher education institutions considering curricular
innovation may find the results from this study beneficial and insightful when
considering similar initiatives. The marketing materials and communication vehicles
employed to share information about the NU Network, Themed Clusters and the Food
Themed Cluster are plentiful and professionally produced. Despite the communication
framework that exists at NU, only three students have completed the program to date.
Rogers (2003) suggested that time is a key element within the diffusion process as it
relates to the rate of adoption for an innovation. Rogers (2003) defined the rate of
adoption as “the relative speed with which an innovation is adopted by members of a
social system” (p.23). The FTC was introduced in 2011 and while the faculty members
teaching in this Themed Cluster adopted this innovative curriculum quickly, the student’s
have been slower to adopt this new initiative.
Innovation in the curriculum.
There were numerous lessons learned when attempting to integrate an innovative
pedagogy model into the curriculum. As several participants suggested, the fact that the
120
FTC exists, is funded and is continually evolving is innovative. Faculty voluntarily
collaborating across disciplines to create opportunities for students to connect courses
employing the theme of food is innovative. The ability to prototype, launch and iterate
the FTC is innovative and models some of the most successful companies in the world
(e.g. Amazon, Google, IDEO, Facebook, Twitter) and aligns with the “trialability” and
“re-invention” of DoI theory (Rogers, 2003; Ryan & Gross, 1943).
Shared governance.
Bok (2013) noted that various stakeholders (i.e. administrators, trustees, faculty,
students and external interests) engaged in shared governance at higher education
institutions can often result in decisions being delayed, stalled or halted. The FTC was
created with a shared governance model and participants indicated that they had
institutional, administrative, trustee and financial support for their program. Faculty
participants collaborated with peers across the disciplines to create and implement the
FTC. According to respondents these relationships with administrators and other FTC
faculty were cooperative and communal. Even with a shared governance model in place
this did not translate into the intended outcomes for students. This study may highlight an
area of focus for all stakeholders involved in curricular change.
The power of food in higher education.
The power of food as a theme in the Food Themed Cluster yielded unanimously
positive responses from participants. Each faculty respondent offered an example of how
the topic of food improved depth, context, student engagement, relevancy for challenging
material and pedagogy (Cargill, 2005) all participants were enthusiastic and passionate
121
about the integration of food in their courses. This single course example impact of the
food-theme may translate into connecting multiple courses interdisciplinarily with the
addition of the Food Seminar.
The institutions identified in this study as exemplars integrating food in the
curriculum (i.e. Harvard, Yale, Stanford, UC – Berkeley) remain committed to including
this theme into courses and sharing their food-themed seminars with their surrounding
communities. This sampling of institutions in addition to NU each cite the power of food
as a universally connective topic that engages students, allows for more depth within
individual disciplines and the potential to work cross-disciplinarily to address significant
food- related issues (e.g. food systems, obesity, hunger, sustainability).
Future Research
This research sought to understand whether; to what extent, and in what ways
food can serve as a unifying element in the general education curriculum. To examine
this, the faculty involved in this innovative curriculum at Narrative University shared
their stories and gave their perceptions about the rationale, implementation and outcomes
of the Food Themed Cluster. This study’s narrative inquiry that captured the insights of
the NU study participants may offer guidance to other faculty, administrators or
institutions considering a similar thematic curricular initiative. In addition, the literature
highlighted a void in research on the topic of thematically connecting the general
education curriculum with the topic of food. This study may contribute to the gap and
provide understanding for educators interested in a comparable curricular initiative.
Based on the findings in this study, additional research on student perceptions of
122
the FTC program, their interest or lack of interest in participation and why would be
beneficial to understand. This knowledge could help craft a different communication
and/or curricular plan to clearly articulate the advantages of choosing the cross-
disciplinary courses available in the FTC and improve participation. It would also be
interesting to experiment with a model that requires each student’s participation in one of
the Themed Clusters as part of the general education requirements. This study
investigated food as a theme to connect a portion of the general education curriculum at
NU. Several NU faculty participants are interested in a fully integrated, food themed
general education option. If NU were to expand and fully integrate the food theme as a
way to connect all general education requirements, this would be a fascinating model to
study.
The FTC is in the first three years of implementation. A follow up study of the
same program and how it has evolved in several more years with a similar research
design may provide additional insights into this innovative program. It would also be
interesting to see what impact the new curricular initiatives have had on enrollment. If
some of the challenges were addressed, particularly assessment data it might offer
insights into what prevented students from wholly embracing the FTC. In addition, a
study that focuses on student perceptions; issues around interdisciplinarity and why this is
difficult to implement and diffuse; the connection of general education to student’s desire
to attend an institution as seen through the lens of enrollment leadership, comparative
studies on diffusion of curriculum innovation in higher education with other institutions;
and a study employing the food theme to connect all distribution requirements in the
general education curriculum.
123
Conclusions
The FTC outcomes to date have been mixed according to study participants.
While this food-themed curriculum is still in its infancy the student participation,
retention and program completion has been lower than anticipated. Faculty respondents
noted that while their students thought the idea of the FTC was interesting, they were not
willing to commit to the curricular and extra-curricular requirements to complete the
program. At the time of the study only three students had successfully completed the FTC.
Students were confused about the benefits of the FTC and how it related to their general
education requirements. Even faculty teaching in the FTC cited their focus on prioritizing
distribution requirements during advising sessions instead of encouraging participation in
the FTC.
Participants suggest that the connections among faculty in the FTC have been
beneficial and improved their teaching through engaging with colleagues from different
disciplines. FTC faculty participants were all enthusiastic about the positive experiences
and intellectual stimulation they have gained from their involvement in this food-themed
curriculum. They also stated that integrating food into their FTC courses positively
impacted their students by adding depth, the ability to relate more effectively to complex
topics and creating an ideal model to examine real world problems.
While conducting this research, the term Gastronomic Literacy emerged from a
compilation of what is occurring with food and curriculum in higher education, the
literature and this inquiry. For this study the term gastronomic literacy is defined as: the
ability to understand the impact of food and its connective properties in our lives, society
124
and the world interdisciplinarily. As food in the curriculum expands perhaps gastronomic
literacy will as well.
Rogers (2003) posits, “getting a new idea adopted, even when it has obvious
advantages, is difficult” (p.1). Therefore, a common problem for many individuals and
organizations is how to speed up the rate of diffusion of an innovation. The adoption of
new ideas is particularly challenging in higher education (Bok, 2013;Fuess & Mitchell,
2011; Lattuca & Stark, 2009; Thelin, 2011).
Thus, this study may offer insights into the challenges involved in curricular
innovation. Although the FTC is still “in the midst” of fully realizing the potential impact
of this relatively new program, the fact that it exists, is funded, supported by
administrators and a dedicated cadre of faculty provides a model for other institutions
considering similar curricular modifications to intentionally connect courses across the
disciplines. In the end, this may be a cautionary tale or a new and delicious offering from
the curricular feast of higher education. Most likely, it’s a bit of both.
125
Documents Collected from and Related to Narrative University
Anonymous (2013), Chronicle of Higher Education
Narrative University (2014). Admissions Department marketing materials
Narrative University (2010; 2011; 2012; 2013; 2014) Blogs
Narrative University (2014). Food Themed Cluster website
Narrative University (2014). Themed Course Clusters Network website
Narrative University (2014). Intuitional website
126
References
Abend, L. (2012). The sorcerer’s apprentices: a season in the kitchen at Ferran Adrià’s
elBulli. New York: Free Press.
American Council of Trustees and Alumni. (2012). What will they learn, 2011-2012? A survey
of core requirements at our nation’s colleges and universities. American Council of
Trustees and Alumni. Retrieved from
http://goacta.org/publications/what_will_they_learn_2011_12
American Management Association. (2010). Critical skills survey. Retrieved from
http://www.amanet.org/news/AMA-2010-critical-skills-survey.aspx
Association of American Colleges &Universities. (n.d.). General education: Promising
models. Retrieved from
http://www.aacu.org/resources/generaleducation/promisingmodels.cfm
Association of American Colleges &Universities. (2009). 2009 member survey: Trends and
emerging practices in general education. Retrieved from
http://www.aacu.org/membership/documents/2009MemberSurvey_Part2.pdf
Association of American Colleges &Universities. (n.d.-b). LEAP: What is 21st liberal
education? Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/leap/what_is_liberal_education.cfm
Association of American Colleges &Universities. (n.d.-c). The LEAP vision for learning:
Outcomes, practices, impact and employer’s views. Retrieved from
http://www.aacu.org/leap/documents/leap_vision_summary.pdf
Association of American Colleges &Universities, & The Carnegie Foundation. (n.d.).
Integrative learning: Opportunities to connect. Retrieved from
http://gallery.carnegiefoundation.org/ilp/
127
Auguste, B. G., Cota, A., Jayaram, K., & Laboissière, M. C. A. (2010). Winning by degrees:
The strategies of highly productive higher-education institutions. McKinsey on Society.
Retrieved from http://mckinseyonsociety.com/winning-by-degrees/
Awbrey, S. (2005). General education reform as organizational change: Integrating cultural
and structural change. The Journal of General Education, 54(1), 1–21.
Bain, K. (2004). What the best college teachers do. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univeristy
Press.
Bateman, C. R. (2010). A strategic framework for auditing and planning for reform of an
undergraduate marketing curriculum: A practical application of the Boyer Commission
Report. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 14(1), 107–128.
Belasco, W. J. (2008). Food: The key concepts. Oxford; New York: Berg.
Berrett, D. (2012, December 17). At U. of Maryland, an effort to make introductory courses
extraordinary. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from
http://chronicle.com/article/At-U-of-Maryland-an-Effort/136317/
Bok, D. (2006). Our underachieving colleges. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Bok, D. (2013). Higher education in America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Boning, K. (2007). Coherence in general education: A historical look. Journal of General
Education, 56(1), 1–16.
Bonnekessen, B. (2010). Food is good to teach: An exploration of the cultural meanings of
food. Food, Culture & Society, 13(2), 279–295. doi:10.2752/175174410x1263394463277
Bourke, B., Bray, N., & Horton, C. (2009). Approaches to the core curriculum: An exploratory
analysis of top liberal arts and doctoral-granting institutions. The Journal of General
Education, 58(4), 219–240.
128
Boyer. (1988). Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America’s research
universities. The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research
Univeristy. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED424840.pdf
Brady, J. (2011). Cooking as inquiry: A method to stir up prevailing ways of knowing food,
body, and identity. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 10(4), 321–334.
Brainard, J. (2010, October 31). A public university joins the expanding $50K club of college
prices. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from
http://chronicle.com/article/A-Public-University-Joins-the/125207/
Briggs, C. (2007). Curriculum collaboration: A key to continuous program renewal. The
Journal of General Education, 78(6), 676–711.
Brint, S., Proctor, K., Murphy, S., Turk-Bicakci, L., & Hanneman, R. (2009). General
education models: Continuity and change in the U.S. undergraduate curriculum, 1975-
2000. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(6), 606–642.
Bryant Conant, J. (1945). General Education In A Free Society. Harvard University Press.
Retrieved from http://archive.org/details/generaleducation032440mbp
Cargill, K. (2005). Food studies in the curriculum: A model for interdisciplinary pedagogy.
Food, Culture & Society, 8(1), 115–123. doi:10.2752/155280105778055371
Chang, K. (2010, October 19). At Harvard, the kitchen is a laboratory. The New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/dining/20Harvard.html
Chavez, C. I., & Hu Poirier, V. H. (2007). Stimulating cultural appetites: An experiential
gourmet approach. Journal of Management Education, 31(4), 505–520.
doi:10.1177/1052562906289744
129
Christensen, C. M., & Eyring, H. J. (2011). The innovative university: Changing the DNA of
higher education from the inside out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in
qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Clandinin, D. J., & Huber, J. (2002). Narrative inquiry: Toward understanding life’s artistry.
Curriculum Inquiry, 32(2).
Clandinin, D. J., Murphy, M. S., Huber, J., & Orr, A. M. (2009). Negotiating narrative
inquiries: Living in a tension-filled midst. Journal of Educational Research, 103(2).
doi:10.1080/00220670903323404
Clandinin, D. J., Pushor, D., & Orr, A. M. (2007). Navigating sites for narrative inquiry.
Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1).
Conle, C. (2000). Thesis as narrative or “what is the inquiry in narrative inquiry?” Curriculum
Inquiry, 30(2).
Craig, C. J. (2009). Research on the boundaries: Narrative inquiry in the midst of organized
school reform. Journal of Educational Research, 103(2).
doi:10.1080/00220670903323883
Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. (2008). Research design qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches.
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Cronon, W. (1998). “Only connect”...The goals of a liberal education. The American Scholar,
67(4), 73–80.
130
Crowell, E. (2011). A narrative inquiry into the development of an academy: Storied lives,
storied magnet program. Retrieved from http://repositories.tdl.org/uh-
ir/bitstream/handle/10657/275/CROWELL-.pdf?sequence=2
Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (1997). Narrating the organization: dramas of institutional identity.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Dewey, J. (2001). The school and society & The child and the curriculum. Mineola, NY:
Dover Publications, Inc.
Digitale, E. (2010). Stanford food summit encourages researchers to collaborate across
disciplines. Retrieved from http://med.stanford.edu/ism/2010/november/food-1104.html
Duster, T., & Waters, A. (2006). Engaged learning across the curriculum: The vertical
integration. Liberal Education, 92(2), 42–47.
E.A.T. (2013, May 29). E.A.T.—Diversity for the Palate. Retrieved from
http://www.lvc.edu/News/index.aspx?newsid=a69b75aa-518c-42bc-9424-
517cc2ccf9a6&HeadLine=E.A.T.%E2%80%94Diversity+for+the+Palate
Food Day. (n.d.). Food Day is a nationwide celebration and a movement for healthy,
affordable, and sustainable food. Food Day. Retrieved from http://www.foodday.org/
Friedman, T. (2008, February). Tom Friedman on education in the “flat world.” Retrieved
from http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.neu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=b07503de-66ce-4e1c-
adb2-
15944dcb44ba%40sessionmgr112&vid=1&hid=104&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2
ZQ%3d%3d#db=ehh&AN=28780726
Fuess, S., & Mitchell, N. (2011). General education reform: Opportunities for institutional
alignment. The Journal of General Education, 60(1), 1–15.
131
Fulton, A. (2013, October, 1). Now you can go to Harvard and learn cooking science from top
chefs. NPR.org. Retrieved from
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/09/30/227918426/now-you-can-go-to-harvard-
and-learn-cooking-science-from-top-chefs
Gaff, J. (2004). What is a generally educated person? Peer Review, 4–7.
Gaff, J., & Ratcliff, J. L. (1997). Handbook of the undergraduate curriculum: A
comprehensive guide to purposes, structures, practices, and change. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
George Washington University. (2013). José Andrés food course: Teaching & learning
collaborative. Retrieved from http://tlc.provost.gwu.edu/jos%C3%A9-andr%C3%A9s-
food-course
Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The Story of Success. New York, NY: Little Brown.
Gumport, P., & Snydman, S. (2002). The formal organization of knowledge: An analysis of
academic structure. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(3), 375–408.
Hale, T. (2010). Food the social network of the ages. Retrieved from
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/newswire/2010/food-the-social-network-of-the-ages.html
Hallinan, M. T. (2011). Frontiers in sociology of education. Dordrecht [u.a.: Springer.
Harvard, F. of A. and S. (2007). Report of the taskforce on general education. Harvard
University. Retrieved from
http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic830823.files/Report%20of%20the%20Taskforce
%20on%20General%20Education.pdf
Harvard, S. (n.d.). Science and Cooking 2013 Lecture Series | Harvard School of Engineering
and Applied Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.seas.harvard.edu/cooking
132
HarvardX. (2013, October 8). HarvardX: Science & cooking: From haute cuisine to soft
matter science. edX. Retrieved from https://www.edx.org/course/harvardx/harvardx-
spu27x-science-cooking-haute-639
Henry, S. (2012, August 28). UC Berkeley serves up an edible education this fall.
Berkeleyside. Retrieved from http://www.berkeleyside.com/2012/08/28/uc-berkeley-
serves-an-edible-education-this-fall/
Huber, M., & Hutchings, P. (2009). Integrative learning: Mapping the terrain. Retrieved from
http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/sites/default/files/publications/elibrary_pdf_636.pdf
Huber, M., Hutchings, P., & Gale, R. (2005). Integrative learning for liberal education. Peer
Review, 7(4), 4–7.
Ireland, C. (2009, September 4). Welcoming Gen Ed: Harvard forum extols new general
education requirements. Harvard Gazette. Retrieved from
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/welcoming-gen-ed/
Isaacson, W. (2011). Steve Jobs. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Kanter, S., Gamson, Z., & London, H. (1997). Revitalizing general education in a time of
scarcity: A navigational chart for administrators and faculty. Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
Kiley, K. (2013, January 30). North Carolina governor joins chorus of Republicans critical of
liberal arts. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/01/30/north-
carolina-governor-joins-chorus-republicans-critical-liberal-arts
Kirschner, A. (2012, April 8). Innovations in higher education? Hah! The Chronicle of Higher
Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Innovations-in-Higher/131424/
133
Klein, J. (2005). Integrative learning and interdisciplinary studies. Association of American
Colleges & Universities - Peer Review, 7(4), 8–10.
Kurland, N., Best, M., Wohldmann, E., Cox, H., Pontkis, K., & Wasishth, A. (2010).
Overcoming silos: The role of an interdisciplinary course in shaping a sustainability
network. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3(3), 457–476.
Lattuca, L. R., & Stark, J. S. (2009). Shaping the college curriculum: Academic plans in
context. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Lattuca, L. R., Voigt, L. J., & Fath, K. Q. (2004). Does Interdisciplinarity Promote Learning?
Theoretical Support and Researchable Questions. The Review of Higher Education,
28(1), 23–48. doi:10.1353/rhe.2004.0028
Latzer, B. (2004, October 8). Common knowledge: The purpose of general education. The
Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Common-
Knowledge-the-Purpose/12903
Lazerson, M. (2010). Higher education and the American dream: Success and its discontents.
New York, NY: Central European University Press.
Leonard, B. J. B. (2007). Integrative learning as a developmental process: A grounded theory
of college students’ experiences in integrative studies. Retrieved from
http://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/1903/7156/1/umi-umd-4513.pdf
MacDougall, J. (2000). Creating coherence in general education curricula: Lessons from
interdisciplinary junior/senior. The Journal of General Education, 49(4), 239–255.
doi:10.1353/jge.2000.0030
McEntee, J. (2011, March). Ready, steady, cook, learn. Physics World, 10, 11.
134
Miller, J., & Deutsch, J. (2009). Food studies: An introduction to research methods. New
York: Berg.
Mindess, A. (2012, December 12). UC Berkeley’s Edible Education: Stories, revelations.
Berkeleyside. Retrieved from http://www.berkeleyside.com/2012/12/12/uc-berkeleys-
edible-education-course-stories-revelations/
Mirabella, R., & Balkun, M. (2011). Developing a four-year integrated core curriculum:
Advice for avoiding pitfalls and building consensus for change. The Journal of General
Education, 60(4), 215–233. doi:10.1353/jge.2011.0020
Moody’s. (2013). Moody’s: 2013 outlook for entire US Higher Education sector changed to
negative. Moodys.com. Retrieved from https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-2013-
outlook-for-entire-US-Higher-Education-sector-changed--PR_263866
Mrig, A. (2013). General education reform: Unseen opportunities. Retrieved from
http://www.academicimpressions.com/PDF/GeneralEducationReform.pdf?qq=20215v27
4891yT
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2012). Education Statistics: Fast facts. Retrieved
from http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84
Nelson-Laird, T., Niskode’-Dossett, A., & Kuh, G. (2009). What general education courses
contribute to essential learning outcomes? The Journal of General Education, 58(2), 65–
84.
Nestle, M., & McIntosh, W. A. (2010). Writing the food studies movement. Food, Culture and
Society, 13(2), 159–179. doi:10.2752/175174410X12633934462999
135
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013). Education at a glance
2013: United States. Retrieved from
http://www.oecd.org/edu/United%20States%20_EAG2013%20Country%20Note.pdf
Perez, J., & Howard, P. (2007). Consumer interest in food systems topics: implications for
educators. Journal of Extension, 45(4). Retrieved from
http://www.joe.org/joe/2007august/a6.php
Pervin, L. A. (1967). The college as a social system: A fresh look at three critical problems in
higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 38(6), 317. doi:10.2307/1980233
Philpott, J., & Strange, C. (2003). “On the road to Cambridge”: A case study of faculty and
student affairs in collaboration. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(1), 77–95.
doi:10.1353/jhe.2003.003
Pink, D. (2006). A whole new mind: Why right-brainers will rule the future. New York, NY:
Penguin Press.
Pittendrigh, A. (2007). Reinventing the core: Community, dialogue, and change. The Journal
of General Education, 56(1), 34–56.
Pollan, M. (2006). The omnivore’s dilemma: a natural history of four meals. New York:
Penguin Press.
Pollan, M. (2009). In defense of food: an eater’s manifesto. New York: Penguin Press.
Pollan, M. (2013). Cooked: A Natural History of Transformation. New York: Penguin Press.
Ratcliff, J. L. (2004). Re-envisioning the change process in general education. New Directions
for Higher Education, 2004(125), 97–118. doi:10.1002/he.142
136
Resor, C. (2010). Food as a theme in social studies classes: Connecting daily life to
technology, economy, and culture. The Social Studies, 101, 236–241.
doi:10.1080/00377009003284997
Robinson, K. (2006). TED Talk: Schools kill creativity. Retrieved from
http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html
Robinson, L. (2009, January). A summary of diffusion of innovations. Enabling Change.
Retrieved from http://www.enablingchange.com.au/Summary_Diffusion_Theory.pdf
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Rosenthal, E. (2009, March 15). In Rome, the academy learns to cook. The New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/fashion/15rome.html
Rozin, P. (2005). The meaning of food in our lives: A cross-cultural perspective on eating and
well-being. Journal of Nutrition Education & Behavior, 37, S107–S112.
Slow Food. (n.d.). Slow Food USA. Retrieved from http://www.slowfoodusa.org/about-us
Sommer, C., Rush, L., & Ingene, D. (2011). Food and culture: A pedagogical approach to
contextualizing food-based activities in multicultural counseling courses. Counselor
Education and Supervision, 50, 259–273.
Spiegel, J. (2012, April 13). Truly food for thought. New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/education/edlife/truly-food-for-thought.html
Steel, C. (2011, spring). A new food manifesto: It’s time to take back control of how we eat:
Here’s why. Ode Magazine, 42–49.
Steele, S. (2006). Curricular wars. The Journal of General Education, 55(3-4), 161–185.
Tarde, G. (1903). The laws of imitation. New York, NY: Holt.
137
The Carnegie Foundation. (1977). Missions of the college curriculum: A contemporary review
with suggestions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
The College Board. (2012). Trends in college pricing 2012. Retrieved from
https://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/college-pricing-2012-full-report_0.pdf
The Culinary Institute of America, & Harvard University. (2013, June). Menus of Change
2013 Annual Report. Retrieved from
http://www.ciaprochef.com/strategic/pdf/MOC2013_AnnualReport.pdf
The Edible Schoolyard Project. (2013, February 14). Rome Sustainable Food Project. The
Edible Schoolyard Project. Retrieved from http://edibleschoolyard.org/node/1642
The Edible Schoolyard Project. (n.d.). Edible Education 103: Telling stories about food and
agriculture. Retrieved from http://edibleschoolyard.org/node/3344
Thelin, J. R. (2011). A history of American higher education (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: The
Johns Hopkins Press.
The National Leadership Council for Liberal Education & America’s Promise. (2007). College
learning for the new global century. Retrieved from
http://www.aacu.org/leap/documents/GlobalCentury_final.pdf
The Univeristy of Maryland. (2010). Transforming general education at the University of
Maryland: The Univeristy of Maryland plan for general education. University of
Maryland. Retrieved from GenEdPublic-Dec2010.pdf
University of Barcelona. (2009, October 8). Universitat de Barcelona - Ferran Adrià presents
Bullipedia project to cooks and cooking schools at the UB. Retrieved from
http://www.ub.edu/web/ub/en/menu_eines/noticies/2013/03/057.html
138
University of California- Berkeley. (2007). General education in the 21st century: A report of
the University of California Commission on General Education. University of California.
Retrieved from http://cshe.berkeley.edu/publications/general-education-21st-century-
report-university-california-commission-general
Wehlburg, C. (2010). Integrated general education: A brief look back. New Directions for
Teaching and Learning, (121), 3–11. doi:10.1002/tl.383
Wolf, P., & Hughes, J. C. (2008). Curriculum development in higher education: Faculty-
driven processes and practices. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Yale Sustainable Food Project. (n.d.-a). Yale Sustainable Food Project. Retrieved from
http://yale.edu/sustainablefood/
Yale Sustainable Food Project. (n.d.-b). Yale Sustainable Food Project: Education. Retrieved
from http://yale.edu/sustainablefood/education.html
Yale University. (1828). The Yale report. Retrieved from
http://www.yale.edu/terc/collectiblesandpublications/specialdocuments/Historical_Docu
ments/1828_curriculum.pdf
Young, E. (2012). New book looks at college students motivated by creativity, not grades.
Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/17/new-book-looks-
college-students-motivated-creativity-not-grades
Zayed, K. (2012). Reform in the general education movement: The case of Michigan State
College, 1938–1952. The Journal of General Education, 61(2), 141–175.
doi:10.5325/jgeneeduc.61.2.0141
Zingg, P. (1987). Quality in the curriculum: The renewed search for coherence and unity. The
Journal of General Education, 39(3), 173–192.